About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Lessee of William Pollard's heirs, &c. (etc.), Plaintiffs in Error, vs. Gaius Kibbe, Defendant in error U.S. 353 (1840)

handle is hein.slavery/ussccases0080 and id is 1 raw text is: JANUARY TERM, 1840. LEssEE OF WILLIAM POLLARD'S HEIRS, &C., PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, Vs. GAIUS KIBBE, DEFENDANT IN ERROR.* Action of ejectment in the state Court of Alabama, for a lot of ground in the city of Mobile. The plaintiff'claimed the title to the lot under an act of Congress, and the decision of the state Court was against the right and title so set up and claimed. A writ of error was prosecuted to the Supreme Court of Alabama. It was held that this case was embraced by the twenty-fifth section of the Judiciary Act of 1789, which gives thfs Court jurisdic- tion to revise the judgment of the state Court, ir iuch cass. The act of Congress under which title was claimea, being a private act, and for the benefit of the city of Mobile, and certain individuals; it is fair to presume it was passed with reference to the particular claims of individuals, and the situation of the land embraced in the law at the time it was passed. A lot of ground was granted by the Spanish government of Florida, in 1802, to Forbes and Company, in the city of Mobile, which was afterwards confirmed by the commissioners of the United States. The lot granted was eighty feet in front, and three hundred and four feet in depth, bounded on the east by Water street. This, while the Spanish govern- ment had possession of the territory, was known as a water lot. In front of the lot Wasa lot which, at the time of the grant of the lot to Forbes and Company, was covered by the water of the bay and river of Mobile, the high tide flowing over it; and it was separated from Forbes and Company's lot by Water street. It was afterwards, in part, reclaimned by Lewis, who had no title to it, and who wa's afterwards driven off by one of the firm of Forbes and Company. A blacksmith's shop was then put on the lot by hin; and Lewis, again, by proceedings at law, obtained 'possession of the blacksmith's shop, it not being his improvement. The improvemeift'was first made in 1823. The Spanish governor,.in 1809, after the Louisiana treaty of 1803, and before the territory west of the Perdido was out of the possession of Spain, granted the lot in, front of the lot owned by Forbes and Company, to William Pollard! bui the commissioners of the United States, /appointed after the territory was in the full possession of the United States, refused to confirm the same, because of the want of improvement and occupation. In 1824, Congress passed an act, the second section of-which gives to those who have improved them, the lots in Mobile, known under the Spnish government as ,, water lots, except when the loe so, improve(' 'ad been alienated, and except lots of which the Spanish government hiad made new graots, or orders of survey, during the time the Spanish government had power to grant the same; in which case, the lot is to belong to the alienee' or the grantee. In 1836, Congress passed an act for the relief of William Pollard's heirs, by Which the lot granted by the Spanish government of 1809, was given to the heirs, savifig the rights of third persons ; dnd a patent for ttis lot was issued to the heirs of William Pollard, by the United States, on the 2d of July, 1836. Held, that the lot lying east of the 16t granted in 1802, by the Spanish government, to Forbes and Company, did not pass by that grant to Forbes and Company ; that the act of Congress of 1824, did not vest the title in the lot east of the lot granted in 1802 in Forbes and Company ; and that the heirs of Pollard, under the sMcond section of the act of 1824, which excepted from the grant to the city of Mobile, &c., lots held under riew grants from thq Spanish go- vernment, and under the act of Congress of 1836, were entitled to the lot granted in 1809, by the Spanish governor to William Pollard. The term new grants, in 'its ordinary acceptation, when applied to the same spibject or object, is the-opposite of old. But such cannot be its meaning in the.aot of Congress of 1824. The term was doubtless used in relation to the existing condition of the ter- itory in which such grants were made. The territory had been ceded to the United States by the Louisiana treaty ; but, in consequence of a dispute with Spain about the boundary line, had remained in'the possession of-Spain. During this time, Spain con- tinued to issue evidences of tites to lands within the territory in dispute. The term Mr. Chief Justice TASqEr was prevented sitting in this case by indisposition. 2 G2 45

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most