In clothing the courts with chancery powers for the adjustment of liens and distribution of money, the legislature meant not to infringe on the suitor’s constitutional right of trial by jury; and, accordingly, we find its mandate to direct an issue, where facts are in contest, is peremptory. The question to be determined, here, was exclusively a question of fact — whether the judgments in contest were collusive — which depended almost entirely on parol evidence; and the court was obviously bound to send the parties before a jury.

Decree reversed, and record remitted with directions to award an issue with precedence on the trial list.