Page:Hempstead's Reports.pdf/414

Rh

 In district court. In supreme court.
 * 1) Where precise locality is not given to a concession, a survey is necessary to sever the land from the royal domain.
 * 2) Surveys were necessary under the Spanish government.
 * 3) Case of Heirs of Elisha Winter v. United States, ante, p. 344, cited and approved.
 * 1) In 1795, Baron de Carondelet, the governor-general of Louisiana, made a grant of land on the Mississippi River, upon condition that a road and clearing should be made within one year, and an establishment made on the land within three years; neither of which was complied with, nor was possession taken under the grant until after the cession of the country to the United States.
 * 2) The excuses for these omissions, namely, that the grantee was commandant at the post of Arkansas, and that the Indians were hostile, are insufficient; as he must have known these conditions when he obtained the grant.
 * 3) According to the principles established in Glenn & Thurston v. Unued States, 13 How. 250, the Spanish authorities would not have confirmed this grant; neither can this court do it.
 * 4) The grant is void, because the land cannot be located by a survey.

October, 1848.—Petition for the confirmation of a Spanish land claim, determined in the District Court, before the Hon. Benjamin Johnson, district judge, under the act of congress of June 17, 1844 (6 Stat. 676), reviving act of May 26, 1824 (4 Stat. 62).

A. Fowler, for the petitioners.

S. H. Hempstead, district attorney, for the United States.

Albert Pike and D. J. Baldwin, for Horace F. Walworth.