cause, in their own names, and that each of the said parties should pay the separate costs in this suit made by them.

The bill then charges, that although the said decree purports it be made by consent of parties, nevertheless it does not appear by whom these complainants were represented in that behalf or who assumed to consent to the said decreee in behalf of these complainants.

The bill further charges, that said decrees and orders, and each thereof, were duly enrolled in the said court.

The bill further shows, that before the entry of the said last above mentioned decree, and about the month of May, 1866, the said Aloys Schenrick, and Teresina his wife, and the said Alexander Hicklin, and Estefana his wife, by their deeds in due form of law, had conveyed to the said Lucien B. Maxwell, all the interest of the said Estefana and Teresina, being the undivided two-twelfths interest in the said grant of lands, and that likewise before the entry of said last mentioned decree, and about the third day of May, 1866, the said Guadalupe Bent, had also executed her deed of conveyance, wherein, after reciting that she had been appointed guardian ad litem, and commissioner in chancery, for these complainants, the minor heirs of the said Alfred Bent, deceased, by order of the said district court, the said Guadulupe Bent, by virtue of the power and authority in her confided by the said decree, and in consideration of the sum of six thousand (6000) dollars, in her conveyance recited to have been paid to her by the said Lucien B. Maxwell, assumed and pretended to grant, bargain and sell unto the said Maxwell all the right, title and interest of the complainants herein, in and to the lands and grant in question, to wit: the undivided one-twelfth interest in the said lands and grant.

The bill further shows and charges, that the said Guadalupe Bent, is the mother of the complainants herein, that she is a Mexican woman, and at the time of her appointment as guardian ad litem to these complainants, and at the time of the execution of the said pretended conveyance, and at the time of the entry of the said last recited decree, she was wholly ignorant of the English language, unable to read, write or speak the same; unfamiliar with business or proceedings of courts of law, unacquainted with the rights of the complainants, or her duties in that behalf, or of the bounds or extent of the said lands and grant, or of the character or value thereof; and ignorant of the confirmation of said grant by act of congress, and ignorant of the decree of the said district court, directing partition of the said grant, as hereinbefore set forth, or of what part or share in the said grant, was claimed by the father of these complainants in his lifetime.

The bill then charges, fully and in detail, the various alleged false representations made to the said Guadalupe Bent by the said Maxwell, and by the said Schenrick, by procurement of the said Maxwell, and that amongst other things, it was represented to the said Guadalupe Bent, that the land or grant in question was comparitively worthless, that it contained little or no minerals, and was only fit

for grazing land, and that it only extended to the north line of the territory of New Mexico, and that the said Maxwell, was the owner of the major part of the said grant, and was about to purchase the shares and interest of all the other owners therein, and would control the whole of said grant, and would exclude these complainants from all shares and part thereof, and that she, the said Guadalupe Bent, was authorized to sell and convey the interest of these complainants, and that unless she should accept the said sum of six thousand (6000) dollars, neither she nor these complainants, would ever realize anything from the interest of these complainants in the said grant.

The bill then charges, that being moved and induced by the said representations, and by the great power and influence of the said Maxwell, the said Guadalupe Bent, executed the pretended conveyance of the interest of these complainants in the said premises.

It further charges that the said Maxwell never paid to the said Guadalupe Bent, nor to these complainants, nor to anyone for them, the said sum of six thousand dollars.

It further charges, that neither at the time of the entry of the said last recited decree, at the September term, 1866, of the said district court, nor at any time before or after did the said Guadalupe Bent or counsel or solicitor for said Guadulupe Bent, or any other person, authorized to agree or consent for these complainants in that behalf, in fact agree or consent, as in said last mentioned decree is falsely recited, or agree or consent to the entry of the said last mentioned decree, or to the vacation or setting aside of the former decree hereinabove recited.

And it further charges, that the said order and decree at the said September term, 1866, of the said district court, was procured to be entered in the absence of the said Guadalupe Bent, and without notice to her of any intention to apply therefor.

It further charges, that if the said Guadalupe Bent ever did consent to the entry of the said decree, at the September term, 1866, of the said district court, said consent was obtained by the importunity and fraudulent and false representations of the said Schenrick, and without explanation to the said Guadalupe Bent of the true meaning, purpose or effect of said decree, and that the said Guadalupe Bent, in and about giving such consent, was entirely ignorant of the effect of the said decree, and ignorant of the former decree, whereby the said Alfred, Teresina and Estefana were invested with the onefourth part of the said grant.

The bill further charges that the said Maxwell or some other person or persons by procurement of the said Maxwell, caused it to be falsely represented to the said district court that these complainants, or the said Guadalupe Bent, in their behalf, had agreed and consented to the setting aside of the said decree first herein recited, and to the entry of the said last mentioned decree, as the same was entered of record at the September Term, 1866, of the said district court, and that solely by reason of such false repre

sentations, and the concealment hereinafter charged, the said district court, without any reference to the Master, and without any inquiry or judicial examination as to whether the said decree would be beneficial to the complainants herein, gave and entered the said decree.

The bill further sets forth the great value of the lands in the said grant, and that at the time of the entry of the decree at the September Term, 1866, of the said district court, the interest of these complainants was reasonably worth the sum of one hundred thousand ($100,000) dollars, and the same hath ever since then been appreciating in value.

The bill further shows that the father of these complainants, said Alfred Bent, left a considerable estate in house and lands, other than said grant, and in money and personal property, and that the said Guadalupe Bent, the mother of these complainants, out of the said estate, was then and always afterwards well able to support and educate these complainants, and that at the time of the entry of the said decree, at the September term, 1866, aforesaid, of the said district court, there was no necessity for the sale of the interest of these complainants in the said lands.

The bill further shows, that all and singular, the facts therein set forth, by which the value and extent of the said grant, and the estate, real and personal, other than said grant, left by the said Alfred Bent, and the ability of the said Guadalupe Bent, out of the said estate to maintain and educate these complainants, and that all and singular the before mentioned facts touching the execution by the said Guadalupe Bent, of the said pretended conveyance to the said Lucien B. Maxwell, and the fraud and imposition praticised upon her in procuring said conveyance, were by procurement of the said Maxwell concealed from the said district court at the time of the entry of the said last recited decree, at the September term, A. D. 1866.

The bill then recites at length the various errors of law alleged to have been committed by the district court, upon the foregoing statement of facts.

It further charges, that the decree, so as aforesaid entered, at the September term of the said district court, 1866, for Taos county, hath never hitherto been carried into execution, that no such conveyance as the said decree directed has ever been made by the said Guadalupe Bent, nor has the said Lucien B. Maxwell, or any one for him, ever paid the amounts therein directed to be paid to the said Guadalupe Bent.

The bill further recites, that the said "Maxwell Land Grant & Railway Company," (assignee of said Maxwell), and the said Lucien B. Maxwell, and Luz B. Maxwell, his wife, about the year 1870, exhibited in the district court, in and for the said county of Colfax, their bill of complaint against the complainants herein, and the said Guadalupe Bent, (then known as Guadalupe Thompson, she having intermarried with one George W. Thompson), as administratrix of the

estato of the said Alfred Bent, and George W. Thompson, her husband, setting forth, among other things, the said two decrees of the said district court of the county of Taos, and praying that the trust in said mentioned decrees established and declared, might be adjudged terminated and extinguished, that these complainants, by George Boyles, their guardian ad litem, as also the other defendants, answered the said bill of complaint, and that thereafter a decree was entered in the said district court, whereby it was decreed, that the said premises be, and were, held by the said Maxwell Land Grant and Railway Company, free and discharged of any and all trusts, right, title and interest in or to the same in favor of or appertaining to the said Guadalupe Thompson, either in her own right, or as administratrix of the said Alfred Bent, deceased, the said George W. Thompson, her husband, and the said complainants herein, Charles Bent, Alberto Silas Bent, Juliano Bent, or any or either of them; that upon appeal of all of said defendants to the supreme court of the territory, the said last-mentioned decree was affirmed, and that upon the further appeal of all of the said defendants to the supreme court of the United States, the said last-mentioned decree was reversed, and the said cause was remanded back to the supreme court of the territory, and thence into the district court of the said county of Colfax, and that in the said last-mentioned court the said Maxwell Land Grant and Railway Company hath amended its bill in divers particulars, but sets up, nevertheless, the decree so as aforesaid entered, at the September term, 1866, of the district court of said Taos county and relies thereon, and prays as in the said original bill before amended, all of which these complainants now allege is contrary to equity and good conscience.

The bill further shows, that by reason of the decree so as aforesaid made and given at the September term, 1866, of the district court for Taos county, and the pretended conveyance by the said Guadalupe Bent, of the interest of these complainants in the said premises, these complainants have been unable hitherto to have execution of the decree made and given as is above set forth, or to have partition of the said lands as in the said recited decree directed. The bill then recites the conveyance in July, 1870, by the said Lucien B. Maxwell, and Luz B. Maxwell, his wife, of most of the lands in the said grant to the Maxwell Land Grant and Railway Company, and it further recites the conveyance by said Maxwell and wife of portions of the excepted lands to various other parties, who are all made parties to this suit so far as their names are known or could be learned.

The bill then prays that the decree of the said district court for the said county of Taos, made and entered of record at the May term, A. D. 1865, establishing the right of the complainants' ancestor and the said Estefana and Terisina in and to the equal undivided one-fourth part of the said grant of lands, and directing partition thereof, may stand and be enforced and carried into execution in all things, and that if need be, other commissioners be appointed to

effectuate the said partition (some or all of the original commissioners having died or left the territory), and that if need be an inquiry be had, in such manner as the court may direct, as to what lands. if any, have at any time been conveyed by the said Maxwell to any person or corporation; that the decree aforesaid made and entered at the September term, A. D. 1866, of the said district court in and for said county of Taos, be reversed, annulled and from henceforth held for naught; that the pretended conveyance of the interest of these complainants in and to the said grant of lands, so as aforesaid pretended to be executed by the said Guadalupe Bent (now Thompson) may be declared null and void, and delivered up to be cancelled, and that an accounting may be had with the parties who have held the lands since the time that the right of these complainants to share in them was determined, and that such net gains and profits as may be found to be due to the complainants be paid to them.

The complainants then pray for such further or other and different relief as may seem according to equity and good conscience. To this bill, the material allegations of which we have recited, the defendants interposed a demurrer which was sustained by the court below.

The case comes before us now for review of the alleged errors in the court below in sustaining the demurrer.

Several special causes of demurrer were assigned by the defendants, which we will consider in their order.

The first is, "that it appears from the said bill of complaint, that all the matters and things set forth in the said bill, and the issues involved therein, are involved in another cause now pending in this court, wherein all the necessary parties to the said bill are parties."

It does appear by the said bill, that another cause is pending in the court below, between the plaintiffs and some of the defendants herein; but it is quite evident that to secure the relief prayed for by these plaintiffs, all the parties necessary are not parties to the bill referred to.

By this bill, the plaintiffs demand relief against all persons now claiming to have an interest in the lands in question in both suits, and have properly made parties to it all the parties to the original bill, the decree in which this suit is brought to impeach, and every person claiming through or under any or either of them. It is quite clear, that without making all the persons privately interested in the land in question, parties to the suit, the complainants would not be entitled to the relief they ask for, it being a well established principle that no one ought to be affected by any decree, without his first being heard, and certainly every person now claiming interest in these lands would be affected by the relief which is prayed for on behalf of the plaintiffs.

The rule as laid down by high authority is as follows: "If it appears by the bill that another suit is pending relating to the same matter, a defendant may demur. Such demurrer, however, will not