�ENNER ?. GREAT NORTHERNRAILWAY. 209 U. had no title to the land in controversy. At common law neither an infant, an i?n?-?ne person, married woman, alien enemy, nor person having no interest in the cause of action, can maintain a suit in his or her own name; but it never would be contended that the court would not have jurisdiction to inquire whether such disability in fact existed, nor that the case could be dis- missed on motion for want of iurisdiction. The right to bring a suit is entirely distinguishable from the right to prosecute the particular bill. One goes to. the m?intenance of any action; the other to the m?intenanec of the particular action. Thus it was held in the case ?f $rMt? v. McKay, 181 U.S. 355, and Bl? v. Hinck/?, 173 U.S. 501, that it was not a question of the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court that the action should have been brought at law instead. of in equity. The question in each cam is whether the plaintiff has brought himself within the language of the jurisdictional .act, whatever be the form of his action or whether it be in law or in equity. The objection that plaintiff has failed to comply with Equity Rule 94 may bc raised by demurrer, but the admitted power to decide this ques- tion is ?Jso an admission that the court has jurisdiction of the case." These observations maynot have been strictly neeessary to the disposition of the case, but they declare the true purpose and effect of the rule. The j'urisdiction of the Circuit Court is prescribed by laws enacted by Congress in pursuance of the Constitution and this court by its rules has no power to increase or diminish the jurisdiction thus cre?ted, though it may regu- late its exercise in any m?nner not incomistent with the laws Of the United States. Congress has given to the Circuit Courts jurisdiction of all suits of a. civil nature (in which the matter in dispute is of a certain value) where "there shall be a contro- versy between citizens of different States," language taken from that part of the Constitution which de?mes the judicud power. There was such a controversy in the ca? at bar, and the Circuit Court had cogulzanes of it. The juti?m?mt of the Circuit Court is
�
