delivered .the opinion of the court.

The Bank of Commerce, located at Savannah, Ga., being insolvent and- unable to proceed with its business, made, an-assignment of its property to John C.- Ferrill for the benefit of its, creditors', of whom the appellant; was one. He commenced this suit ltin behalf of himself and all otner parties in like, condition' who will concur and unite ’and contribute to the. expenses,,r to obtain a decree in his own fav.or against the bank for . the amount of his debt; an account by the assignee; the conversion, of the .assigned property into, money under the authority and direction' of the court, and the distribution of the proceeds' among the creditors according to the assignment. In the progress of the cause a decree was rendered against, the bank and in favor of Terry for $.23,297. Afterwards decrees were entered requiring all persons interested, in.-the distribution of the assets to make themselves-parties,-and'referring the cause tó a master to take, testimony arid report the amounts due to the *45 several claimants, tlie nature of their respective claims, and the order in which they were entitled to payment out of the fund in court.

The master reported, allowing claims amounting in the aggregate to about $425,000, all of which were entitled to participate pro rata in the- distribution. Among the claims allowed were the decree in favor of Terry, $23,297, and several judgments in favor of George W. Hatch, amounting in all to $75,000.

Terry excepted to the report, because, —

1. An account of $25; presented by him, and on which he claimed priority of payment over the other creditors, had been disallowed; and, —

2. The claim in favor of Hatch had been allowed.

Both these exceptions were overruled. The amount allowed to Hatch was increased to $88,000, or thereabouts; the report in all'other respects confirmed,'and an order entered for the payment of the fund in court to the several creditors, in accordance therewith. '

The amount of the fund in court for distribution is stated to have been about $30,000, and the total amount of the allowed claims not far from $440,000; so that Hatch would •receive for his dividend, under the decree as .entered, about $6,000.

Terry took this appeal, which is separate, “ without joining any other party .to the record with him as appellant,” or any party as defendant except Hatch. Such was the order, of the Circuit Court when allowing the appeal upon his petition.

Hatch now moves to dismiss, for the reason that the “ matter in dispute!’ is .not. sufficient in amount or value to give this court jurisdiction.

Sect. 692, Rev.- Stat., in. force when this appeal was taken, permitted' appeals to this court “from’ all final 'decrees of any circuit coiirt, or of any district court acting as a circuit court, in cases of equity, and of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction, where the matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000.”

The matter in' dispute between the parties who are here is. that part of- the "money payable to Hatch under the -.decree which would have gone to Terry if his exceptions had.been *46 sustained. Terry presented an account for $25, on which he claimed priority of payment; but, upon its disallowance, Hatch became entitled to no more than his share upon a pro rata distribution of that amount to all the creditors. So, too, Hatch, upon the allowance of his claim, became entitled undei the decree tó a dividend of about $6,000; but, if it had been disallowed, Terry would have received only his share of the amount of the dividend upon a like pro rata distribution. If Terry succeeds in this appeal, he can only recover from Hatch what would have been distributed to him in the court below, if his exceptions had been there sustained. The aggregate of the claims allowed, deducting that of Hatch, is about $350,000; and of this amount Terry has but, $23,297. Upon a distribution of the amount decreed to Hatch among the other creditors, the dividend would be less than two per cent upon the amount of' the several claims, or 'but little more than $500 to Terry. It is clear, therefore, that the amount in dispute is less than $2,000. Appeal dismissed.