The United States, Plaintiff In Error v. John Gratiot, Robert Burton, Charles Hempstead, and Dickerson Moorehouse, Defendants In Error

Decision Date01 January 1840
Citation14 Pet. 526,39 U.S. 526,10 L.Ed. 573
PartiesTHE UNITED STATES, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. JOHN P. GRATIOT, ROBERT BURTON, CHARLES S. HEMPSTEAD, AND DICKERSON B. MOOREHOUSE, DEFENDANTS IN ERROR
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

These lead mines—'the United States lead mines on the Upper Mississippi'—are situated on Fever river, partly within the northern portion of the state of Illinois, and partly in the territory of Wisconsin. They are of course within 'the territory northwest of the river Ohio,' ceded by Virginia to the United States, by the deed of cession, dated 1st March, 1784, (1 Story's Laws of the U. S. 472;) which deed ceded 'the soil as well as the jurisdiction.' In consequence of that cession, the old Congress passed their ordinance of 20th May, 1785, (1 Story's Laws of the U. S. 563,) for the survey and sale of the ceded lands. That ordinance, after directing the land to be surveyed into lots of one mile square, and all 'springs, mines,' &c. to be noted, authorized their exposure to public sale; but it directed that from such sale there 'should be reserved, for the United States, four lots in each township;' and also, 'one-third part of all gold, silver, copper, or lead mines, to be sold or disposed of as Congress should afterwards direct.' The ordinance of 9th July, 1788, which repealed some portions of that of 1785, left these provisions in full force, up to the formation of the Constitution.

The third section of the fourth article of the Constitution provides, that 'Congress shall have power to dispose of, and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property, belonging to the United States.' This clause was legislated upon by the act of 18th May, 1796, (1 Story's Laws, 422, 423,) which provided for the survey and sale of a large portion of the northwestern territory. In the second section of that act, the surveyors were directed to note 'all mines, salt-licks, salt-springs, and mill-seats;' and by the third section, every salt-spring, and a mile square around it, and certain central sections of every township were excluded from sale, and 'reserved for the future disposal of the United States.' On the 10th May, 1800, (1 Story's Laws 789,) an act supplementary to this was passed, which expressly provided 'that the lands of the United States, reserved for future disposition, might be let on leases by the surveyor-general, for terms not exceeding seven years.' When Ohio was formed into the first state in the northwestern territory, Congress stipulated, by the acts of 30th April, 1802, and 3d March, 1803, (2 Story's Laws, 870. 890,) that the reserved sections, and certain other sections of land then unsold, should be granted to the inhabitants for the use of schools, and that the legislature should hold them in trust for that exclusive purpose; that the reserved salt-springs should be granted 'for the use of the people of the state,' under such regulations as the legislature should direct: and that the same should never be sold, nor leased for a longer period than ten years.' In the following year, an act was passed providing for 'the disposal of the public lands in the Indiana territory,' embracing therein the whole public domain...

To continue reading

Request your trial
92 cases
  • Utah Power & Light Co. v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • November 24, 1915
    ... ... payment therefor to the plaintiff ... Appellee ... is a corporation ... United States v. Gratiot, 14 Peters, 526, 10 L.Ed ... 573; Pollard v ... Carr and others brought suit against one Charles R. Hannan, ... etc., to quiet the title to ... ...
  • Annie Kean v. Calumet Canal Improvement Company
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • October 23, 1901
    ...the evidences or muniments of right it bestows, are all the work of Federal functionaries alone.' In United States v. Gratiot (1840) 14 Pet. 526, 537, 10 L. ed. 573, 578, considering an objection that Congress was without power to lease the public lands, it was said (p. 537, L. ed. p. 'Cong......
  • Samuel Downes v. George Bidwell
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • May 27, 1901
    ...was also asserted by Chief Justice Marshall in M'Culloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316, 422, 4 L. ed. 579, 605, and in United States v. Gratiot, 14 Pet. 526, 10 L. ed. 573. So, too, in Church of Jesus Christ of L. D. S. v. United States, 136 U. S. 1, 34 L. ed. 478, 10 Sup. Ct. Rep. 792, in hold......
  • State v. Tuesburg Land Co.
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • June 25, 1915
    ...States. Irvine v. Marshall, 20 How. 558, 15 L. Ed. 994, 999;Wilcox v. Jackson, 13 Pet. 498, 10 L. Ed. 264, 273;United States v. Gratiot, 14 Pet. 526, 537, 10 L. Ed. 573, 578;Gibson v. Chouteau, 13 Wall. 92, 20 L. Ed. 534, 536;Packer v. Bird, 137 U. S. 661, 11 Sup. Ct. 210, 34 L. Ed. 819;Shi......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • The Property Clause, Article Iv, and Constitutional Structure
    • United States
    • Emory University School of Law Emory Law Journal No. 71-4, 2022
    • Invalid date
    ...with other contemporary statements with significant weight, including early Supreme Court case law. See, e.g., United States v. Gratiot, 39 U.S. 526, 538-39 (1840) (upholding the lease of federal land within the borders of a state). Congress can obtain exclusive jurisdiction over federal pr......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT