“ From these extracts it is plain that the court of claims did not regard it as its duty under the act of 1885 to investigate and determine the rights of each individual of a class, but only to determine the validity and amount of a claim, with a specification of ownership sufficient to identify the claim itself, for the payment of which an appropriation might be thereafter made. The particular individuals of the class would be matter for subsequent investigation by some other tribunal. ”

“ In the certificates, as well as in the report of the court of claims, it is evident that the court assumed that the persons entitled to the distributive share of the moneys were the next of kin of the original sufferers, whoever they might turn out to be, although the court supposed that William B. Buchanan was the survivor of the firm that suffered the loss in 1798. ”

“ Rep. 585; United States v. Price, 116 U.S. 43, 29 L. ed. 541, 6 Sup. Ct. Rep. 235, and United States v. Louisville Sinking Fund Comrs. 169 U.S. 249, 42 L. ed. 735, 18 Sup. Ct. Rep. 358, are not in conflict with this result. ”