336 HAMMOND v. HAMMOND—2 BLAND.

be regarded as taking the position of either plaintiffs or defend-
ants as their * interests of the nature of the case may require.
350 Finch v. Winchelsea, 1 P. Will 281; Leigh v. Thomas, 2
Vex. 313; McMechen v. Chase, 1 Bland, 85, note; Williamson v.
Wilson, 1 Bland, 433. And as it must appear, in all eases, where
a creditor undertakes, by a creditor's suit, to represent the inte-
rests of others, that the relief sought is, in its nature, beneficial
to those others, it follows, that where a creditor may sue either
for his own claim alone, or as well in behalf of others as of him-
self, that he should, by an express averment in his bill, make
his election to sue in the one way or the other; Baldwin v. Law-
rence, 1 Cond. Cha. Rep. 331; and where he has sued merely in his
own name, but can only obtain the relief he seeks by suing as well
in behalf of the other creditors as himself his bill must be amended
to that effect before or at the hearing. Good v. Blewitt, 13 Fes.
301; Johnson v. Compton, 6 Cond. Cha. Rep. 20. But, in general,
it is the nature of the case which gives to it the character of a
creditor's suit; for an allegation in the bill, that the plaintiff sues
as well for himself as other creditors, will not alone justify its being
treated as a creditor's suit where the case does not warrant it; nor
will the omission of such an allegation prevent its being so con-
sidered, where the nature of the case is such as to require the credi-
tors to be called in. Shepherd v. Kent, Free. Cha. 190; S. C. 2 Vern.
435; Martin v. Martin, 1 Ves. 214; Anonymous, 3 Atk. 572; Strike's
Case, 1 Bland, 84; Williamson v. Wilson, 1 Bland, 430.

The establishment of the whole, or a part, of the claims of all,
or of some one or more of the originally suing creditors, is the first
point to be determined. In all cases, it is indispensably necessary
that the plaintiff should sustain the facts of his case, either by
proof, or by the admission of his opponents; for, otherwise he can
have no standing in Court, nor any right to sue, whatever may be
the law arising out of such facts. If, therefore, the claim of the
plaintiff he denied by all, or by any one of the defendants, it must be
proved. Lingan v. Henderson, 1 Bland, 230; Tyson v. Hollingsworth,
ante, 327, note; Hindman v. Clay ton, ante, 337, note.

A guardian ad litem of an infant defendant, being appointed by
the Court for the purpose of having the proceedings substantiated
against him, so that justice may be done to the plaintiff, Beauraine
Beauraine, 4 Eccle. Hep. 456; Boraine's Case, 16 Ves. 346, like a
solicitor, becomes thereby so far one of the guardians of the Us,
that he is bound to have it conducted with as much fairness and
benefit to the infant as the nature of things will permit. Co, Litt.
88, note 70 and 135; Taylor v. Atwood, 2 P. Will. 643, note 1; Snow-
den v. Snowden, 1 Bland, 552. It is * his duty to use all
351 proper diligence in answering for the infant; Snowden v.
Snowden, I Bland, 553; and in seeing that the proofs are correctly
taken and brought in; Quantock v. Bullen, 5 Mad. 81; and he will