Page:Hempstead's Reports.pdf/358

Rh   representatives an opportunity to test the validity of their claims, and if found good such claims are confirmed, and this may be considered as a judicial renunciation on the part of the government of all title. All other questions are left to be determined in other tribunals of the country. It is no concern of the government as to who is the particular owner. The real inquiry in these cases is, whether the government is the owner; and when that is decided against herself, she has no further concern in the controversy, and certainly cannot allow the owners to divide and parcel out their property, and settle their rights as against each other in this tribunal. This court has no such jurisdiction.

The plea and demurrer are both well taken, and the petition must be dismissed.

Petition dismissed.

On the 31st October, 1846, a motion was made to reconsider, but it was overruled by the court.



September, 8, 1846.—Petition to confirm and divide a Spanish claim, under the act of 26th May, 1824, (4 Stat. 52,) in the District Court of Arkansas, before the Hon. Benjamin Johnson, district judge.

L. Janin, S. L. Johnson, and A. Fowler, for petitioners.

S. H. Hempstead, district attorney, for the United States.  JOHNSON, J., said, this case was like the one of A. Waldo Putnam, just decided, except that the grant asked to be divided was made to William Winter, whose heirs are seeking a confirmation thereof in this court; and that the same principles applying, the petition in this case should be dismissed.

Petition dismissed.

On the 31st October, 1846, a motion was made for reconsideration, but was denied.