
    Patton et al. vs. Wagner et al.
    The statutory regulations for partition of land, do not take away tlie original jurisdie tion of chancery.
    
      Appeal from the Circuit Court of St. Francis county, in Chancery.
    
    Hon. George W. Beazley Circuit Judge.
    Williams & Williams, for the appellants,
    cited Eq. Dr. 299; 1 Story's Eq. Jur. 646 to 658; 4 Dessau. 86; 3 Am. Ch. Dig. 171, to show that.the Chancery Court has jurisdiction in cases of partition.
   Mr. Justice Scott

delivered the opinion of the Court.

This was a bill for partition of lands. It seems to have been regularly filed and order of publication was taken against all the defendants as non-residents. No exception seems to have been taken as to the statutory notice. But the Court seems to have proceeded in dismissing the bill upon the ground, that our various statutory provisions as to partition have taken away the original jurisdiction of chancery on this head.

In this the Court below was in error. The statute but cumulates the remedy; and if, nevertheless, a party should elect to seek his remedy in chancery, as these parties seem to have done, he is entitled to such as the Chancellor can afford him.

The order of the Court dismissing the bill, will, therefore, be reversed, and the cause remanded with directions to the Court below to proceed with the case according to law.  