said divisions, may be served and executed in either or all of said divisions. All issues of fact in civil causes triable in any of the said courts shall be tried in the division where the defendant or one of the defendants resides, unless by consent of both parties the case shall be removed to some other division. (26 U. S. Stats. 45.)

be

§ 21 (732). Suits for pecuniary penalties and forfeitures, where to brought.—All pecuniary penalties and forfeitures may be sued for and recovered either in the district where they accrue, or in the district where the offender is found. (Rev. Stats. sec. 732.)

§ 22 (733). ui ts for internal revenue taxes, where to be brought.-Taxes accruing under any law providing internal revenue may be sued for and recovered either in the district where the liability for such tax occurs, or in the district where the delinquent resides. (Rev. Stats. sec. 733.)

A suit for taxes cannot be brought in any other district than where the tax accrues, or where the defendant resides. (U. S. v. N. Y. & N. H. R. R. Co., 10 Ben. 144.)

§ 23 (734). Seizures, where cognizable. -Proceedings on seizures, for forfeiture under any law of the United States, made on the high seas, may be prosecuted in any district into which the property so seized is brought and proceedings instituted. Proceedings on such seizures made within any district shall be prosecuted in the district where the seizure is made, except in cases where it is otherwise provided. (Rev. Stats. sec. 734.)

Where a scizure is made on the high seas, jurisdiction attaches in the court of any district into which the prop erty is brought. (The Marion, 9 Wheat. 391; The Abby, 1 Mason, 360; The Little Ann, 1 Paine, 40.) So jurisdiction as to forfeitures is given where the seizure is made. (Keene v. U. S., 5 Cranch, 304; The Ann, 9 Cranch, 289; The Octavia, 1 Gall. 488; The Abby, 1 Mason, 360; The Reindeer, 2 Wall. 383; U. S. v. Barrels, 3 Int. Rev. Rec. 114.) A district court has no jurisdiction in rem where the seizure was made in another district. (The Little Ann, 1 Paine, 40.)

§ 24 (737).

When a part of several defendants cannot be served.-When there are several defendants in any suit at law or in equity, and one or more of them are neither inhabitants of nor found within the district in which the suit is brought, and do not voluntarily appear, the court may entertain jurisdiction, and proceed to the trial and adjudication of the suit between the parties who are properly before it; but the judgment or decree rendered therein shall not conclude or prejudice other parties not regularly served with process nor voluntarily appearing to answer; and non-joinder of parties who are not inhabitants of nor found within the district as aforesaid shall not constitute matter of abatement or objection to the suit. (Rev. Stats. sec. 737).

At law. On a joint contract, where a citizen cues the State where suit is brought and a citizen of another State, and both are served with process, jurisdiction attaches, and the voluntary appearance of the latter will not deprive the court of jurisdiction (McCloskey v. Cobb, 2 Bond. 16; Taylor v. Cook, 2 McLean, 516); as any of the parties to a joint contract may be sued. (Clearwater v. Meredith, 21 How. 489.) So an action lies against one of several executors (U. S. v. Lackus, 6 McLean, 443); and so of

corporations where some of the corporators are citizens of another State than where the corporation was created. (Louisville R. Co. v. Letson, 2 How. 497; but see Com. & R. Bank v. Slocomb, 14 Peters, 60.) A creditor may maintain an action against partners some of whom are not residents of the district (Imbusch v. Farwell, 1 Back, 566), or an action on a promissory note, although one of the defendants is a citizen of the same State with plaintiff (Doremas v. Bennet, 4 McLean, 224); but if there is no allegation as to the citizenship of one of the defendants the verdict will be set aside, although he was not served with process. (Bargh v. Page, 4 McLean, 10.)

In equity.-This section is only a legislative affirmance of a previously established rule of equity (Shiels v. Barrow, 17 How. 130); as in equity parties are either formal, and persons having an interest, and who should be made parties, are necessary parties, without whom no decree can be entered. (Shields v. Barrow, 17 How. 130; Northern Ind. R. Co. v. Mich. Cent. R. Co., 15 How. 233; Ribon v. Railroad Cos., 16 Wall. 445; see Winter v. Ludlow, 3 Phila. 464.) Jurisdiction is not defeated by naming a person as one who would have been joined, except that joining him would defeat the jurisdiction. (Heriot v. Davis, 2 Wood & M. 229; Vattier v. Hinde, 7 Peters, 252.)

Necessary parties.-If a bill seeks to hold a surety liable, the principal is a necessary party. (Robertson v. Carson, 19 Wall. 94.) So the debtor is a necessary party to a bill brought to aid the enforcement of a judgment. (Wilson v. City Bank, 2 Sum. 422.) So a corporation is indispensable to a bill by a receiver to have equitable assets applied to the payment of a debt. (Brigham v. Luddington, 12 Blatchf. 237.) If a party claims an interest in the fund in controversy, he is a necessary party (Williams v. Bankhead, 19 Wail. 563); but one who has assigned his iuterest is not a necessary party. (Robertson v. Carson, 19 Wall. 94.) Partners bringing an action for a demand due the firm, all the partners are necessary parties. (Parsons v. Howard, 2 Woods, 1.) The court will not decree a reduction of a license made to three parties jointly on a bill against one alone. (Florence Sew. Mach. Co. v. Singer

Manuf. Co., 8 Blatchf. 113.) On a bill for enforcement of a mortgage, the mortgagor is a necessary party (Robertson v. Carson, 19 Wall. 94); and on a bill to set aside a sale the vendor is a necessary party. (Coiron v. Milandson, 19 How. 113.) So on a bill to restore the rights of a stockholder, the corporation is a necessary party. (Kendig v. Dean, 97 U. S. 423.) So where parties have a joint interest, all are indispensable (Cameron v. McRoberts, 3 Wheat. 591); as on a bill in equity which seeks an account of profits and the cancelation of a deed. (Tobin v. Walkinshaw, 1 McAr. 26.) If a trust fund depends on the result of an account, all the cestuis que trust are necessary parties. (Greene v. Sisson, 2 Curt. 171.) On a bill to enforce a trust the debtor's assignee in bankruptcy is a necessary party. (Russell v. Clarke, 7 Cranch, 69.) So if an heir files a bill charging defendant with trust property and prays an account, the personal representative of the ancestor is a necessary party. (West v. Randall, 2 Mason, 181.) A party who files a bill to enforce a deed of trust after an assinment of the equity of redemption cannot obtain a decree in the absence of a judgment creditor who has bought the property under an execution sale. (Young v. Cushing, 4 Biss. 456.) So on a bill for an account or partition, the court must have jurisdiction over all the defendants. (Barney v. Baltimore, 6 Wall. 280.) A decree cannot be made in the absence of an indispensable party. (Parsons v. Howard, 2 Woods, 1.)

Parties not necessary.-On a bill to enforce a mortgage given to trustees where a majority of the trustees are parties, the other trustee is not necessary. (Stewart v. Chesapeake & O. Can. Co. 1 Fed. Rep. 361; 4 Hughes, 41.) So if some of the holders of bonds secured by mortgage are citizens of another State, they are not necessary parties to the foreclosure of the mortgage. (Hotel Co. v. Wade, 97 U. S. 13.) If the assignee of a chose in action files a bill to enforce it, the assignor is not a necessary party. (Batesville Inst. v. Kauffman, 18 Wall. 151.) An heir claiming an undivided surplus in the hands of a trustee need not make the other heirs parties. (West v. Randall, 2 Mason, 181.) On breach of trust all are severally as well as jointly liable. (Parsonз v. Howard, 2 Woods,

1.) A distributee of an estate may maintain an action to recover his share without the other distributees being parties. (Payne v. Hook, 7 Wall. 125.) A creditor may maintain a bill against a legatee, although the personal representative of the debtor living in another State is not made a party. (Milligan v. Millege, 3 Cranch, 220.) If the bill alleges fraud in the purchase of goods, the trustee in insolvency of the vendee is not a necessary party. (Heriot v. Davis, 2 Wood. & M. 229.) A party selling by contract an equitable title, and subsequently claims th t it has become void, a decree for its surrender need not make the holder of the legal title a party to it. (Boone v. Chiles, 8 Peters, 532.) Where both parties claiming title under a third party who has no interest leit, a decree can be obtained although he is not a party to the suit. (Vattier v. Hinde, 7 l'eters, 252.) A bill may be filed against the collector, auditor and treasurer without joining the State in case of an illegal tax levy. (Osborn v. Bak, 9 Wheat. 738) Jurisdiction is not defeated by the voluntary appearance of a non-resident defendant in a suit instituted by a non-resident. (Pond v. Vermont Val. R. Co. 12 Blatchf. 280; Jones v. Andrews, 10 Wall. 327; Russell v. Clark, 7 Cranch, 69.) Tenants in common with complainant who appear to be entitled to a specially described portion of the premises, and which does not interfere with the part occupied by defendant, jurisdiction attaches. (Elmendorf v. Taylor, 10 Wheat. 152.) A prior eucumbrancer not subject to the jurisdiction of the court, and who cannot be joined without defeating the jurisdiction, is not a necessary party. (Hagan v. Walker, 14 How. 29.) A trustee willing to transfer the stock to the cestui que trust in a bill to compel a transfer by the corporati n. (Mechanics' Bank v. Seton, 1 Peters, 299.) If the defendant has a distinct interest, and substantial justice can be done, jurisdiction attaches as to him alone. (Cameron v. McRoberts, 3 Wheat. 591; Nesmith v. Calvert, I Wood & M. 34.) If parties are not essential to the litigation, or such over whom the court has no jurisdiction, they may be stricken from the bill, and the cause proceed as to the rest (Carneal v. Banks, 10 Wheat. 181; Vattier v. l'inde, 7 Peters, 252); but if all the defendants are served with process or volunta: ily appear, the ccree will bind all.