12 FEDERAL REPORTER.
court of the United States have held that a decree like that which
was rendered in the suit of McClure v. Stacy was absolutely void, for
lack of jurisdiction of the person of the defendant. Being an equita-
ble action, and equity acting only upon the person, and the person
not being within the jurisdiction of the court, that decree must be
treated in the federal courts as void. Hart v. Sansom, 110 U. S. 151;
S. C. 3 Sup. Ct. Rep. 586. Redden, purchasing from McClure after
that decree, got no higher title—no better title-to the land than he
would have had but for the decree. He simply purchased from Mc-
Clure, who had purchased from Russum, and all that he got was the
. naked legal title, the full equitable title being in Stang. Counsel
says in his brief that Bedden purchased upon the advice of counsel,
—advice to the effect that McClure had a perfect title, legal and
equitable; and, further, in reliance upon the decree,—a decree au-
thorized by the letter of the statute. I do not think the advice of
counsel cuts any figure in the case at all. It is not a question of the
. good faith of the transaction. He was chargeable with notice of all
that the records of Shawnee county showed. They showed a mort-
gage from Russum to his mortgagee. They showed, in the records of
the district court, the foreclosure of that mortgage, the sale of the
property, and the confirmation of the sale, and therefore the vesting
of the full equitable title in the purchaser. They showed the con-
veyances from that purchaser down to Stang. So, whether he did,
as a matter of fact, examine the records or not, he had constructive
notice that the full equitable title was in Stang; and whether counsel
advised him otherwise is immaterial.
There is one matter of costs that I think there was an error in, and
should be corrected. The decree charged all costs against Redden;
and, of course, upon the face of it, that carried all the costs in the
suit from the time that McClure filed his bill, before Itedden had ac-
quired any interest in the land, or had been made a party to the
suit,——all the costs of the state, as well as this, court. That is a
mistake, and the order will be modined so as to carry the costs
against Redden from the time only that he was made a party to the
suit. The other costs will be paid by McClure, the party who com-
menced the action.