Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 9.djvu/243

 228 FEDERAL REPORTER. �chosen attorney in the suit at law. This is a necessity. Hia resi- dence may be unknown, or, if known, remote. His attorney is pre- snmed to know how and where to communicate with him. Therefore it is proper to give such notice to the attorney, and it is the duty of the attorney to bring such notice to the attention of his client. If he does not, or until he does, it is proper that the client should submit to any stay the court may direct of further proceedings in the suit at law; reasonable time being given for the communication of such notice to the client that he may discontinue the suit at law or defend the suit in equity, or put the matter into the hands of other eounsel, or have a fair opportunity to take such other course as shall be deemed advisable. It may be proper to cause an additional and direct notice to be served on the plaintiff in the suit a.t law personally, if that is feasible. �It is provided by section 1 of the act of March 3, 1875, (18 St. at Large, 470,) that no civil suit shall be brought before a circuit court or a district court "against any person, by any original process or proceeding, in any other district than that whereof he is an inhab- itant, or in which he shall be found at the time of serving such pro- cess or commencing such proceeding, " except as provided in section 8 of the same act, which provides for bringing in absent defendants in suits to enforce or remove liens on property within the district. Substantially the same provision as to "original process" was con- tained in section 11 of the act of September 24, 1879, (1 St. at Large, 79,) and was re-enaeted in section 739 of the Revised Statutes. A. subpœna or notice issued on the filing of such a bill as those in the present suits has never been regarded, in the courts of the United States, as an original process or proceeding, a,nd has been allowed to be served on the attorney for the plaintiff in the suit at law, and even to be served on such plaintiff out of the district. Logan v. Patrick, 5 Cranch, 288; Read y. Consequa, 4 Wash. 174; Ward v. Seabry, Id. 426; Dunlap v. Stetson, 4 Mason, 349, 360; Dunn v. Clarke, 8 Pet. 1,3; Bates v. Delavan, 5 Paige, 299; Doe v. Johnston, 2 McL. 323, 325; Sawyer v. GUI, 3 Woodb. & M. 97; Segee v. Thomas, 3 Blatehf. 11, 16; Kamm v. Stark, 1 Sawy. 547, 550; Loivenstein v. Glidewell, 5 Dill. 325. �It is further objected that the supreme court, by rule 13 in equity, has provided that "the service of all subpœnas shall be by a delivery of a copy thereof, by the officer serving the same, to the defendant personally, or by leaving a copy thereof at the dwelling-house or usual place of abode of each defendant, with some adult person who ��� �