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/ussccases0455 and id is 1 raw text is: LLOYD ET AL. v. FULTON.
court to intervene by petition and summary proceedings to
obtain a delivery of the moneys to which they are entitled. The
forty-third admiralty rule recognizes this right; and in cases
without number the right has been enforced. The power of the
court over moneys belonging to its registry continues until they
are distributed pursuant to final decrees in the cases in which
the moneys are paid. If from any cause they are previously
withdrawn from the registry without authority of law, the
court can, by summary proceedings, compel their restitution.
In the present case, it is no answer to the order for restitution
that the appellants received the moneys they obtained as
officers of the court, and that they have long since ceased to be
such officers. If the moneys were illegally taken, they must be
restored; and, until a decree of distribution is made and enforced,
the summary power of the court to compel restitution remains
intact. The power could be applied in no case more fittingly
than to previous officers of the court.
The careful and labored reports of the commissioners ap-
pointed by the court to examine into the proceedings in the
confiscation cases, ascertain the expenses incurred, and trace
out as far as possible the moneys received, were properly con-
firmed. There is no objection to their findings which merits
consideration.
The decree brought before us for review must be affirmed,
except as to the costs of the proceedings subsequent to the pres-
entation of the application of the petitioner. Those costs
should be apportioned against the parties ordered to make
restitution, according to the respective amounts they are ad-
judged to restore. The cause will, therefore, be remanded, with
directions to modify the decree in this particular; but, in all
other respects, The decree is affirmed.
LLOYD ET AL. V. FULTOx.
1 As the provision of the English Statute of Frauds touching promises made
in consideration of marriage is in force in Georgia, a promise there made,
but not in writing, to settle property upon an intended wife, is void. Such
promise after marriage is also void for want of consideration.
Oct. 1875.]](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ussccases0455&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)