The United States Appellants v. Stephen Fernandez and Others

• Court: U.S. Supreme Court
• Citation: The United States Appellants v. Stephen Fernandez and Others, 35 U.S. 303, 10 Pet. 303, 9 L.Ed. 434 (1836)
• Decision Date: 01 January 1836
• Parties: THE UNITED STATES. APPELLANTS v. STEPHEN D. FERNANDEZ AND OTHERS

35 U.S. 303

10 Pet. 303

9 L.Ed. 434

THE UNITED STATES. APPELLANTS v. STEPHEN D. FERNANDEZ AND OTHERS.

January Term, 1836

APPEAL from the superior court for the district of East Florida.

The case was presented to the court by Mr Butler, attorney-general, for the United States; and by Mr White, for the appellees.

Mr Justice BALDWIN delivered the opinion of the Court.

This is an appeal from the decree of the judge of the superior court for the eastern district of Florida, confirming the claim of the appellees to sixteen thousand acres of land, pursuant to the acts of congress for the adjustment of land claims in Florida.

In the court below, the petition was in the form prescribed by law; presenting a proper case for the exercise of the jurisdiction of the court.

The claim of the petitioner was founded on his application to the governor of East Florida, for a grant of sixteen thousand acres of land, in consideration of his services to the Spanish government; which was granted to him at the place specified, with directions to make the surveys there, or at any other that may be vacant. This grant was made, the 16th of November 1817; and surveyed in May and June 1818, in four different tracts.

Various objections were made in the court below to the confirmation of the title, which have not been pressed here, as they have been overruled in the previous decisions of this court.

The only one which has not been distinctly considered, is to that part of the land surveyed which lies within the Indian boundary; where, it is contended, the governor had no power to grant lands. In the case of Arredondo, the grant was of lands within the Indian boundary; but which, by a proceeding in the nature of an inquest of office at the common law, were declared to be annexed to the royal domain, by their abandonment by the Indians. 6 Peters 741. In the case of Mitchell, the original grant was made by the Indians themselves, of lands which had not reverted or been ceded to the crown; so that the broad question of the validity of an original grant, by the governor, of lands within the Indian boundary, which had not by any official act been decreed to form a part of the royal domain, has never come directly before us. It is now distinctly presented for our adjudication, and ought to be decided.

This subject was so fully and ably considered in M'Intosh v. Johnson, that we have only to refer to the language of the court to show that every European government claimed and exercised the right of granting...