HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/ussccases0405 and id is 1 raw text is: Dec. 1866.] UNITED STATES V. REPENTIGNY. 211
Syllabus.
The only plausible ground upon which the jurisdiction
can be sustained in the case before us is, that the several
judgment creditors are proceeding against a commonfund,
which each is interested to have applied to the payment
of his demand. But the same ground for the jurisdiction
existed in the case of the seaman, salvors, and owners of
cargo for damages. The answer is, that the interest of the
judgment creditors in the common fund could not exceed
the amount of their several and separate judgments, and if
these are under the $2000, the same reason exists for cutting
off the appeal as if the suit had been separate and not joint.
indeed, the joinder of parties complainant in the case of
creditors' bills is so much a matter of form, that new par-
ties may come in at almost any stage of the proceedings on
a proper application; and, under special circumstances, even
after decree, if they can show an interest in the common
fund. And the party first instituting proceedings may do
so on behalf of himoelf and all other creditors who may come
in and assume their share of the costs and expenses.
DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION.
NOTE.-Similar decree made for the same reason in the case
of Field v. Bigelow, and in one branch of Myers v. Fenn.
UNITED STATES V. REPENTIGNY.
1. On a conquest by one nation of another, and the subsequent surrender of
the soil and change of sovereignty, those of the former inhabitants who
do not remain and become citizens of the victorious sovereign, but, on
the contrary, adhere to their old allegiance and continue in the service
of the vanquished sovereign, deprive themselves of protection or security
to their property except so far as it may be secured by treaty.
2. Hence, where on such a conquest, treaty provided that the former inhabi-
tants who wished to adhere in allegiance to their vanquished sovereign,
might sell their property, provided they sold it to a certain class of per-
sons and within a time named, the property, if not so sold, became
abandoned to the conqueror.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ussccases0405&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)