Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 8.djvu/154

 14Q FEDERAI» REPORTEE. �of the second mortgage. There is nothing in the easc as it now stands to enable me to determine as to the n^cessity for such an order, or whether if made at all it should be before a sale. That question is therefore left open,, to be settlcd when the details of the decree shali corne up for consideration. �A decree may be prepared in accordance with this opinion. The complainants are entitled to a sale of the mortgaged property, subject to the ascertained prior encumbrances, but until such a decree is pre- pared the injunction heretofore issued in this cause shali remain in force. ���United States op Amebioa v. Gillespie and another, Executors, etc. �(Oircuit Court, D. New Jersey. July 20, 1881.) �1. Equitt — Necessaet Parties — Devisee. �One who, in a certain event, may be interested in the disposition of the estate of a decedent, is not a necessary party to a bill brought by a devisee against the executors praying for an account and a construction of the will. �W. B. Williams, for the application. �A. Q. Keasbey, for the United States. �Nixon, D. J. The bill of complaint was filed in this case by the United States against the executors of Joseph L. Lewis, deceased, substantially, for an account and for a construction of the last will and testament of the testator. The executors only are brought in as defendants. An application is now made in behalf of the officiai authorities of the city of Hoboken, for an order of the court requir- ing the complainant to make the city, or the overseer of the poor, a party to the proceedings, that an answer and defence may be put in in behalf the municipality. The complainants oppose the motion, on the ground that the applicant is not a necessary party, and that the court ought not to compel them to introduce a party whose presence is not needed to enable the court to give the full relief prayed for in the bill of complaint. It is not always easy to ascertain who are proper or necessary parties in an equity proceeding. It is sometimes said that every one should be made a party who bas an interest in the suhject-matter of the suit; and again, it is claimed that only those should be included who are interested in the object of the suit. The applicant here claims the right to come in under the provisions of section 9 of the aot of the legislature of the state of New Jersey, entitled "An act concerning executors and the administration of in- ��� �