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

United States, Appellant, v. Joseph Lawton, Executor of Charles Lawton, Martha Pollard, Hannah Maria Kershaw, Wife of James Kershaw, et al. U.S. 10 (1847)

handle is hein.slavery/ussccases0300 and id is 1 raw text is: '10 SUPREME COURT. The United States v. Lawton et at. Uponthe whole,,we think the certificate under consideration was suficient, and that the deposition, on the ground'stated, ought not to be overruled. Order. This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of the record frm the Circuif Court 6f the United States for the Southern Dis- taint of.Mississippi, and on the point and question on which 'the Judges of the .said Circuit Court, were opposed in -opinion, and which was certified to this court for its opinion, agreeably to the act of Congress in such case made and provided, and was argued by.counseL On consideration whereof; it is the -opinion of this court that the certificate under consideration was sufficient, and that the deposition, on the ground stated, ought not to be over- ruled, Whereupon it is now here ordered and adjudged that it be so certified to the, said Circuit Cout., 'TEi tXITED SITATEs, APPELLANT,.V. Josni' LAw'oN, ExEcuvTo. oF 01AMEs LAWTO6N, M&RT. POLLARD, HAgNAX MAAiA KnSRSAw, Wirn -bP 3.&iMs KEIISHA w, FT A&L. A Spanish grant of land in Florida, for six miles square, at the place caMlld Dunn's lake, upon the river St. John's, is too vague -to be confrmed, even with the aditonal knowledge- that the object, of the grantde was to establish machinery io be propelled by water-liower. The river t. John's meanders so much that it is near Dunn's lake for thirty miles. The suivey might therefore commence at any point of tbis.distance with is-much propriety as at any other point. This concession, cannot -be distinguished finm various others which have been brought bdfore this court. The land granted was not sevexed 'from the king's domain. It remained a .floating grant not recognized by the gtvernment of Spsi before the cession, nor by tlis government since, as conferring an indi- vidual title to any specific parcel of land. Nor is the rit in this case aided by .tWo surveys, one purporting to-have been made in December, 1817, and the. other in the spring of. 1818. The first must kave' been- fictitious, not actually made upon the ground, but merel upon paper; and the second was too iniperfect to be be effectual. Piuiea to the act of May 26, 1824, Congress alQne could act upon these in- 'cipiept titles. By that act power was given to the court to pass a decre for the land, provided its locality, extent, and boundaries could be found. But,. in the present case, this cannot be done. Tzirs was an appeal from the Superior Court of East Florida, under the following circumstances.. ON the-10th of November, 1817, James 'Darley presented the following petiti6n:to Governor Coppinger. To his Excellency the Governor: Don James Darrey, a Dative of Great Britain, with the respect due to your Excellency, says, that wiih the view of settling himselff

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