What is the effect of the Court of Appeal's decision not to intervene in the case of the appellant's claim for intervention in the matter of the funds attached to the claim?

The equity powers of the federal courts over their own process to prevent abuse, oppression, and injustice, are inherent, and as extensive and as efficient as may be required by the necessity for their exercise. They may be invoked by strangers to the litigation, as incident to the jurisdiction already vested, without regard to the citizenship of the complaining and intervening party. Gumbel v. Pitkin, 124 U.S. 131, 8 Sup.Ct. 379, 31 L.Ed. 374. Because we believe the appellant has established his right to litigate the title to the fund attached by reason of his claimed interest therein, we think his application for the intervention should have been granted, and he should not be deprived therefrom because his procedure has not been in accordance with the rule. It is not disputed that the money in the possession of the New York broker came from the French underwriters, and was sent over to them to make adjustment for the benefit of the claimants who lost cargo, and was referred to by an officer of the broker's firm when he spoke of 'the claimants in this case.' He testified:

'Q. You don't claim it yourself? A. No; it belongs to the claimants in this case.

'Q. That is your conclusion? A. It is subject to their order. * * *