THUSTEE9 MUT. BniLMNG FTJND, ETC., ». BOSBEITJX. 835 �ty has nevfir endeavored more than tWs ancillary office, and in that, its true function, it has been amply efficient. From the origin of its jurisdiction it has supplied such rem- edies only as the common law could not furnish. It arose with the birth of commerce, and its jurisdiction has expanded as commerce has grown and civilization advanced. It has, in cautions and conservative spirit, diligently adapted itself' to meet the new-born wants, and to provide for the more and more complicated conditions, of modern society. And now there are few transactions deserving redress which its pow- ers will not reach, and few ends of justice, otherwise un- attainable, which it will refuse to subserve on excuses of technical inaptitude. The «ases cited in the sequel of this opinion are but a few of the many which show the compre- hensiveness of its modern jurisdiction. �In support of the views which have been expressed in what has been said I will proceed now to state with some detail the purport of some of the many authorities which bear upon the questions raised by the demurrer; and I here remark that I have seldom known a bill supported by so great a wealth of authority. That the remedy in this case was not an action at law, but by bill in equity, will abundantly appear from the foUowing cases. [Here the opinion cites and sets out the pur- port of Smith V. Hurd, 12 Met. 371; Allen v. Cv/rtis, 26 Conn. 456; Citizens' Loan Ass'n v. Lyon, 29 N. J. Eq. 110; and Vose V. Grant, 15 Mass. 21.] In this case the supreme court of Massachusetts, after deciding that an action at law on the case in tort will not lie by a bill holder against a stoekholder of a bank which had distributed her capital without providing for its outstanding notes, that remedy being given by statute against stoekholder s, goes on to say: "This is one of the numerous cases which are constantly occurring that show the necessity of a court of chancery for the complete distribu- tion of justice among the people. It is the boast of the com- mon law that it permits no wrong without furnishing a rem- edy. But this is true only where there are courts competent to exercise ail the judicial power which that law requirea �for its due administration. A court of chancery exercises a v.3,no.l4--.53 ����
