
    ALFRED H. ELLIOTT ET AL. v. THE UNITED STATES.
    [Not reported in C. Cls. R.;
    164 U. S., 373.]
    
      Defendants’ Appeal.
    
    On March 13,1863, block 91, in the town of Beaufort, S. 0., was sold by tbe United States direct tax commissioner for South Carolina, under the direct tax acts (12 Stat. 294-423), to satisfy a tax, with penalty and interest, of $127.42 assessed against it, and was bid in by the United States. Said block was assessed for taxation by the said commissioner at $10,000. Subsequently it was divided into two lots, viz, lot A, containing buildings, and measuring on the north line 103 feet; and lot B, measuring on the north line 207£ feet.
    Lot A was resold November 1,1866, at public auction, to T. E. S. Elliott for $200, and was conveyed to him. Lot B was resold at public auction to Thomas M. S. Ehett for $226. At the time of the said sale for taxes the titles in lots A and B, save so much thereof as lies west of a line drawn parallel to the west line of lot A 103 feet west therefrom, were vested in T. E. S. Elliott, as tenant for life, with remainder in fee in Alfred, William, Phoebe, Ann C., James O., Arthur H., Isabella R., Seignley C., Montrose, and Apsley H. Elliott, children of the said T. E. S. Elliott. The said Apsley H. Elliott died in the year 1867, and the other mentioned children are his heirs at law. The said Thomas E. S. Elliott died in 1876. The surviving children, ivlio are the claimants, were of tender years during the late civil war. The value of that part of block 21 owned by the claimants is twenty-nine thirtieths of the whole value of said block.
    Thomas E. S. Elliott, the tenant for life, adhered to the cause of the rebellion, and on the occupation of Port Eoyal by the Union troops in November, 1861, left St. Helena Island, with all the population of those islands, and remained away until after the close of the war. During the entire period of his absence St. Helena Island and the adjacent islands were occupied by United States troops and had been entirely abandoned by the original inhabitants. After the purchase, in November, 1866, by T. E. S. Elliott, the property was seized under execution and sold as his property. Subsequently the purchaser of the property at sheriff’s sale banded to the widow of T. R. S. Elliott the value of her dower in the property. No part of the property has come into the possession or ownership of the claimants, or any one of them, through the said T. R. S. Elliott. The claimants have not repurchased or redeemed any part of said property from the United States, nor has any purchase been made or intended to be on their account.
    On this state of facts the Court of Claims found that the claimants were entitled to recover, and on May 8,1893, entered judgment in their favor for the sum of four thousand one hundred and eighty-five -firs dollars.
    The decision of the court below is affirmed on the ground that as the appellees were admittedly owners; as they themselves neither purchased nor redeemed the land; and as they are not held by any necessary intendment of law to have been represented by the actual purchaser, it follows that they are entitled to the benefit of the remediable statute of 1891.
   Mr. Justice Shiras

delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court, November 30, 1896.  