Where there is more than one surety obligated for the debt of the principal, the creditor may proceed to collect all of the debt from one of the sureties only. This being true, and since the equitable maxim would compel the remaining sureties to make the obligation an equal one between them, we find the main question between co-sureties is the question of contribution. This equitable right has now been fully recognized by the law courts, and a court of law, now, is the usual forum for seeking such a remedy, except in the case where the law court could not give a full and adequate relief. The remedy then would be sought in a court of chancery. Contribution can be enforced by the surety who paid the debt in an action under the common courts.52 Co-sureties are held bound for contribution even though they are become sureties by different instruments, and the law does not release a surety from contribution simply because one surety did not know that the other was also bound to answer for the same debt.53 A surety for other sureties cannot be considered their co-surety. So where one signs as "security for all prior parties," it was held there could be no contribution between him and the other sureties,54 but the law will permit the true relation between the several sureties to be shown by parol, in any event, and contribution will be allowed where they are shown to be co-sureties.

It is the general rule that one of several co-sureties is entitled to the benefit of indemnity secured by another, if this indemnity is received after all have signed and previous to the payment of the debt, and this is the rule even though the surety obtained the indemnity through his individual efforts and it was intended for his benefit alone.55 Indemnity, however, given to one surety, does not always inure to the remaining co-sureties; this would be true where the indemnity is furnished by a stranger.58 A surety may, before he pays the debt, file a bill in chancery to compel his co-sureties to contribute to him; he may also ask to have them restrained from transferring their property, where a proper showing is made,57 so that his remedy to exact contribution will not be lost.

52 Porter vs. Horton, 80 I11. App., 333. 53 Chaffee vs. Jones, 19 Pick., 260.

54 Singer Mfg. Co. vs. Bennett, 28 W. Va., 16.