Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1884-04-02

The debt of Fowle, Snowden s. Co. is
| bottomed therefore on no lien and Is TO
be treated in this suit as au unsecured
claim against which plea of the statute of
limitations has not been interposed.
Coming now to the consideration of the
Hay judgments. Four Of them bad been
assigned to Hay by the original plaintiHs
after they had been recovered. The plain,
tiff5 in two of the four suits were citizens OF
Massachusetts, and the judgments assigned
were rendered respectively on the 25th OF
November, 1857, and on the 9th of Februa-
~, 1858. The other two of these four judy
ginia, and afterwards assigned to Hay, bear
ing date on the 9th of May, 1859, but tax
ing effect as of the 10th of May, 1859. On
these four judgments Hay brought an equity
suit in this Court in 1875, in which he pray
ed that the satistactions which be had
caused 10 be marked on these judgments in
1860 might be set aside, and the liens which
had originally attached to the judgments
might be restored. Decree was obtained in
this suit in 1881. It is objected to the valid
ty Of the decree that this Court had not
Jurisdiction, as to two Of the judgments, to
entertain suit brought by Hay on them,
nasmuch al the second clause of section
first of the Judiciary act of 1875 (Sup. to
Rev. Stat. of L. s., p. ia, ch. l31, declares
That the Circuit Courts OF the United States
shall not have cognizance of suits brought
by assignees of causes of action, where their
assgnors could not sue.
Waving the question whether the decree
under consideration can be applied collater-
ally, it. is to be remarked, that the object OF
the equity suit brought by Hay in this court
was to set aside "SalisiactiOns" which had
been marked upon the judgments at time
when they had become the property OF Hay.
The consideration for which they had been
SO marked had proved null and void. The
sa.isfactions had been executed on al im-
FLIED promise of the company, to Hay him
SELF that if the consideration should fail,
the company would make good the judy
neuts. This obligation, arising CT eqao ct
bono, from the company to Hay himself, was
the cause of action on which the equity suit
was founded 1t was a cause of action aris-
ing directly il favor Of Hay, irrespectively
of the manner in which be had acquired this
property; and the Jurisdiction of this court
to entertain a suit by Hay, a non-resident,
against the A. & w. Company, resident of
Virginia, upon this cause of action, which
had accrued TO himself, was complete.
But even assuming, what is not true, that
the original causes of action on which the
judgments had been obtained in the State
court were still the basis of the equity suit
brought in this court even 10 that case, the
Jurisdiction of this court was good. Two Of
the judgments had been recovered by citi-
zens of Massachusetts, the other two by cit
liens of Virginia AS TO The first two, the
jurisdiction was undoubted. The owner
ofthese brought the suit; and the only ques.
ton is, whether he had right to join, in
his suit, two judgments against the same de.
PENDANT which had been assigned to him
with no purpose or intention of evading the
jurisdiction of the State court. This ques-
ton would seem to be settled by the first
clause of the first section of the act Of 1875,
which provides, in substance, that the Cir
cult Courts of the United States ''shall have
coguizance of all suits DC, &C., in which
there shall be controversy between citizens
of different States &C." The controversy
of Hay respecting the judgments as to which
the jurisdiction was undoubted gave, under
this clause, jurisdiction Of the suit which en-
braced two other controversies which were
not between citizens of different States
1t is true that the clause of the act Of 1875
OH which this objection is based would not
authorize causes of controversy to be en-
braced in suit which had been assigned
for the purpose of having them sued upon
in United States court. Section Of the
same act forbids assignments for such a
purpose; bit this very section, by forbid
ding the joining Of causes of action assign.
ed for this purpose, implicitly authorizes
causes of action not assigned for such pur-
pose to be so embraced. If suit is found
to embrace causes Of action assigned for
this purpose the court will dismiss it as to
such causes Of action, retaining it as to the
others, rs was done By the Supreme Court
of the United States in Inhabitants Of the
Township of Bernards rs. &eb6ins ct al. de-
cided at the present term and reported in
1O9 L. S. 81, and also in 3 Supreme Court
Reporter 272
This principle has been frequently applied
as to parties by the Supreme Court, in suits
in which the court has held, that though
all the plaintiffs and all the defendants
could not be marshaled on opposite sides of
a cause, vet if there be q separable con-
troversy between citizens of different States,
that fact may Of itselfgive jurisdiction of the
whole suit. If separable controversy as to
parties can bring suit into federal court,
there would seem to be no reason why
separable controversy as TO causes Of action
should not do So except, indeed, in cases
where fraud upon jurisdiction is attempted
as contemplated by section of the act of
1875.
These four judgments, having therefore
been legally relieved Of the "salsfactons"
that were marked upon them, and the
liens which they created having been legal
~ restored, must take rank as of the 18th
Of November, 1857, the 9th of February,
1858, and the 10th of May, 1859, respective
ly; and must be given precedence over the
debt Of Fowle, Snowden & Co.
As to the objection that these four judg.
ments, and the three others that were sued
over in this court, by Hay, and judgment
anew obtained upon them in 1881, were
merged in the new decree and judgment ii
is to be remarked, that one of the objects of
section - Of the lS2d chapter of the Code
of Virginia, in requiring judgments to be
kept alive by scire tucias, or new action,
within ten or twenty years, according as
the issuing and return of executions on
them might determine, was to provide
| m Lea ms of keaninp alive INDICTMENTS and their |