case daranda versus Whittingham at the chancellor house Lord chancellor two  become joint and several bind in a bind to the plaintiff both the obligors die  and the plaintiff bring his bill against the heir of one and the executor of  the other obligor and the defendant the heir demurrer because no administrator  or executor of his ancestor be make a party to the bill and it be argue that  this be a good demurrer because by the stand rule of this court the personal  estate be to be apply first to pay debt and because if the representative of  the personal estate be make a defendant he may show he have satisfy the debt  Mr lutwych for the plaintiff we set forth by our bill that the intestate  abscond mosely report er p for several year before he die and that we do not  know where he die that the defendant who be next of kin refuse to take out  letter of administration and that we as principal creditor have apply to the  prerogative court and be oppose by the defendant and deny administration  because we can not prove that the intestate leave good notabilia that we  afterward apply to the consistory court of bath and well where we likewise  fail of administration because we can not prove he die in that diocese and  that the defendant refuse to discover where the intestate die and this general  rule which be a hardship on the plaintiff that he must make the representative  a party when at law he may sue the heir mosely report alone be not so sacred  but that the court dispense with it in many case in the case of Buckley and  Eaton the master of the roll make a decree against the heir for the payment of  a bind debt though the widow the administratrix be not make a defendant  because she be in Ireland and they ought not to demurrer for this reason  because it be not a thing of absolute necessity but there be several excuse  which the court be to judge of at the hear as that he be beyond sea not to be  find or the like Lord chancellor a debtor by bind die leave no personal estate  so that nobody will administer to he must a honest and fair creditor who ought  always to be favour be oblige to take out letter of administration to he and  thereby subject himself to the suit and action of all the other creditor  though never so vexatious but as the defendant who have the right oppose the  plaintiff in take out administration and will not discover where the intestate  die or administer to he I may overrule this demurrer without break in upon the  general rule and without prejudice at the hear for want of party vern vern lev  cook versus cross lev height versus Langham supplem to Wentw Saturday January  the second seal before Hilary term motion