shall record, in a well-bound book, all and every their acts and proceed- Duties of the

ings, the claims admitted, with those rejected, and the reason of their ad- secretary,

mission or rejection. He shall receive as a compensation for his services, His comDen_

one thousand two hundred and fifty dollars, to be paid .quarterly, from «ation.

The eighth article of the Florida treaty stipulates, that "grants of land made by Spain, in Florida, after the 24th of January, 1818, shall be ratified and confirmed to the persons in possession of the land, to the same extent that the same grants would be valid, if the government of the territory had remained under the dominion of Spain." The government of the United States may take advantage of the nonperformance of the conditions prescribed by the law relative to grants of land, if the treaty does not provide for the omission. Ibid.

In the cases of Arredondo, 6 Peters, 691, and Percheman, 7 Peters, 54, it was held, that the words in the Florida treaty, " shall be ratified and confirmed;" in reference to perfect titles, should be construed, "are ratified ana confirmed." The object of the court in these cases was to exempt them from the operation of the eighth article, for that they were perfect titles by the laws of Spain, when the treaty was made; and that when the soil and sovereignty of Florida were ceded by the second article, private rights of property were, by implication, protected. By the law of nations, the rights to property arc secured when territories are ceded; and to reconcile the eighth article of the treaty with the law of nations, the Spanish side of the article was referred to in aid of the American side. The court held, that perfect titles "stood confirmed" by the treaty; and must bo so recognised by the United States, in our courts. Ibid.

Perfect titles to lands, made by Spain in the territory of Florida before the 24th January, 1818, were intrinsically valid, and exempt from the provision of the eighth article of the treaty; and they need no sanction from the legislative or judicial departments of the United States. Ibid.

The eighth article of the Florida treaty was intended to apply to claims to land whose validity depended on the performance of conditions, in consideration of which the concessions had been made; and which must have been performed before Spain was bound to perfect the titles. The United States were bound after the cession of the country, to the same extent that Spain had been bound before the ratification of the treaty, to perfect them by legislation and adjudication. Ibid.

A grant of land by the government of Florida, made before the cession of Florida to the United States by Spain, confirmed: every point involved in the case having been conclusively settled by the court in their former adjudications in similar cases. The United States v. Waterman, 14 Peters, 478.

The Supreme Court, in the case of the United States v. Clark, 8 Peters, 48, say " that if the validity of the grant depends upon its being in conformity with the royal order of Spain of 1790, it cannot be supported ;" but immediately proceeds to show, " though the royal order is recited in the grant, that it was, in fact, founded on the meritorious consideration of the petitioner having constructed a machine of great value for sawing timber; the recital of the royal order of 1790, in this grant, is entirely immaterial, and does not affect the instrument." Held, the recital of the royal order, in this case, is quite immaterial. The United States r. Rodman, 15 Peters, 130.

The case of the United States v. Wiggins, 14 Peters, 325, which decided that certain proof of the certificate of Aguilar, secretary of East Florida, was sufficient, cited; and the decision on that point affirmed. Ibid.

The Spanish governors of Florida had, by the laws of tho Indies, power to make large grants to the subjects of the crown of Spain. The royal order of Spain of 1790, applied to grants to foreigners. These grants, before the cession of Florida to the United States, had been sanctioned for many years by tbe king of Spain, and the authorities representing him m Cuba, the Floridas, and Louisiana. This authority has been frequently affirmed by the Supreme Court. Ibid.

An application was made to the governor of Florida, in 1814, stating services performed by the petitioner for the government of Spain, and the intention of the petitioner to invest his means in the erection of a water saw-mill, and marking the place where the lands were situated which were asked for. The governor granted tho land,referring to the merits aud services of the applicant, and in consideration of the advantages which would result to the home and foreign trade by the use proposed to be made of the land. Held, that this was not a conditional grant; and that no evidence of the erection if a water saw-mill was required to be given to maintain its validity, or induce its confirmation. Ibid.

John Forbes by memorial to governor Kindelan, the governor of East Florida, set forth, that in 1799, tnere had been granted to Panton Leslie and company, for the purpose of pasturage, fifteen thousand acres of land, which they were obliged to abandon, as being of inferior quality. Forbes, as the successor to those grantees, asked to be permitted to abandon these fifteen thousand acres, and in lieu, to have granted to him ten thousand acres, as an equivalent, on Nassau river. The petition avers that the object was to establish asfece plantation. The petition was referred to tho " Comptroller," who gave it as his opinion that the culture of rice should be promoted. Governor Kindelan permitted the abandonment of the fifteen thousand acres granted before, and in lieu thereof, granted to John Forbes, for the purpose of cultivating rice, ten thousand acres in the district, on banks of the river Nassau. Surveys of seven thousand acres of land, at the head of the river "Little St. Mary" or " St. Mary," and three thousand acres in "Cabbage Swamp," were made under this grant. No description of the locality of the land other than that in the certificate of the survey was given; nor do the surveys prove that the land surveyed lay in the district of the river Nassau. No evidence was given of tho situation of " Cabbage Swamp." Held, that these surveys were not made of the land granted by governor Kindelan; and according to the decisions of this court on all occasions, the surveys, to give them validity, must be in conformity with the grants on which they are founded; and to make them the origin of title, they must be of the land described in the grant of the Spanish government. The United States t1. Forbes, 15 Peters, 173.

The courts of justice can only adjudge what had been granted; and declare that tho lands granted by the lawful authorities of Spain, are separated from the public domain: but where the land is expressly granted at one place, they have no power, by a decree, to grant an equivalent at another place,

Vol. HI.—90 3o2

Secretary must the treasury. He shall be acquainted with the Spanish language; and

be acquainted before entering on a discharge of the duties of his office, shall take and

lTn^ua^and'1 SuDScribe an oath, before some authority competent to administer it, that

take an oath. he will "well and truly and faithfully discharge the duties assigned him,

and thereby sanction an abandonment of the grant made by the Spanish authorities. The courts of the United States have no authority to divest the title of the United States.in the public lands, and vest it in claimants; however just the claim may be to an equal value for land, the previous grant of which has failed. Ibid.

The decree of the superior court of East Florida, by which a grant for fifty thousand acres of land, made by governor White, the Spanish governor of East Florida, dated July 29, 1802, was rejected, affirmed. Buyck v. The United States, 15 Peters, 215.

The land had been granted by governor White, on a petition from the grantee stating his intention to occupy and improve the same with Bengal negroes, and native citizens of the United States; and stating that other grants of the same lands had been made, on condition of settlement, which conditions had not been performed, and such grants were therefore void. The petitioner promised to make the settlement within an early period after the grant. The governor granted the land, referring to the petition, also, with the condition that the grantee should not cede any part of the land, without the consent of the government. No endorsement or settlement was at any time made on the land by the grantee. Held, that the government of the United States were not bound under the Florida treaty, to confirm the grant. Ibid.

The description of the portion of the land asked for from the Spanish governor, " lands at Musquito to fifty thousand acres, south and north of said place," is not sufficiently definite : and from such a description no exception could be made from the public lands acquired by the United States under the Florida treaty. The regulations for granting lands in Florida by the Spanish authorities, required that grants should be made in a certain place: and there were no floating rights of survey out of the place designated in the grant; unless when the land granted could not be got there in its exact quantity, and an equivalent was provided for. Ibid.

The laws and ordinances of the government of Spain in relation to grants of land by the Spanish government, must be of universal application in the construction of grants. It is essential to the validity of such grants, that the land granted shall be described so as to be capable of being distinguished from other things of the same kind, or capable of being ascertained by extraneous testimony. ' Ibid.

The certificate of Don Tomas de Aguilar, secretary of the government and province, of the copy of the grant of the governor, stating the same " to be faithfully drawn from the original in the secretary's office under his charge," was legal evidence of the grant; and was properly admitted as such in support of the same. The United States v. Delespine, 15 Peters, 226.

A grant of ten thousand two hundred and forty acres of land by the Spanish governor of Florida, which recited among other things, that it was made under a royal order of the king of Spain, of 29th March, 1815, and which was not in conformity with the grant, but which was made in the exercise of other powers to grant lands which had been vested in the governor, was not made invalid by the recital of the royal order as the authority for the grant. The grant recited also, that it was made in consideration of military services, and was also in consideration of the surrender of another grant previously made, which surrender had been accepted by the governor. These were sufficient inducements to the grant. Ibid.

A claim for land in East Florida, granted by governor Whito to Daniel O'Hara, rejected by the superior court of East Florida, and the decree of that court affirmed. O'Hara v. The United States, 15 Peters, 275.

Governor White, on the petition of Daniel O'Hara, soliciting a grant of fifteen thousand acres, made a decree granting "the lands solicited," "at the place indicated," "in conformity with the number of workers which he may have to cultivate them, the corresponding number of acres may be surveyed to him," "and that he will take possession of the said lands in six months from the date of said grant." Held, that this is a decree not granting fifteen thousand acres as asked for; but so much of the place where it is asked for as shall bo surveyed in conformity with the number of workers the grantee may have to cultivate the land; the quantity could be determined by the regulation of the governor, made the month after the grant, and determining the quantity of land to be surveyed according to the number of persons in the family of the grantee, slaves included. That the grant was made before the dato of the regulation, makes no difference. Ibid.

No settlement was made on the lands claimed under the grant. The building of a house on the land is but evidence of an intention to make a settlement, but was not a settlement; which required the removal of persons or workers to the land, and cultivating it. Ibid.

No claim for the land can be sustained under a grant, or confirmation Oaa prior grant, made by a decree of governor Coppinger in 1819, as the same was substantially a violatreWof the treaty with.Spain, which confirms only grants made before the 24th January, 1818. The prior grant to O'Hara having become void by the non-performance of the conditions annexed to it, the decree of governor Coppinger, in 1819, -was an attempt to make a new grant. Ibid.

If the grant were not void from the non-performance of the conditions of settlement annexed to it, the omission to have the land surveyed, and returned to the proper office, would make it void, unless the grantee had made a settlement; in which event, a survey would be presumed. The grant was made in the " district of Naasau," &c. This was an indefinite description of the land, as was held in Buyck t,. The United States, decided at this term. Ibid.

A concession of lands, by the council at St. Augustine, was not authorized by the laws of Spain, relative to the granting and confirming land titles. The United States v. Delespine, 15 Peters, 319.

When a grant of land is indefinite as to its location, or so uncertain as to the place where the lands granted are intended to be surveyed, as to make it impossible to make a survey under the terms of the grant with certainty, the grant will not be confirmed. Ibid.

The act of Congress of 26th May, 1830, requires that all claims to lands which ha.ve been presented to

and translate all papers that may be required of him by the commissioners."

Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, That said commissioners, previously to entering on a discharge of the duties assigned them, shall,

the commissioners, or to the register and receiver of East Florida, and had not been "finally acted upon," should be adjudicated and settled, as prescribed by the act of 1828. There was no direct limitation as to the time in which a claim should be presented. Ibid.

When a petition for the confirmation of a claim to lands in Florida was presented, and was defective, and the court allowed an amended petition to be filed, it would be too strict to say the original petition was not the commencement of the proceeding, but that the amendment allowed by the superior court should be taken as the date when the claim was first preferred. Ibid.

When certain testimonials of title under a Spanish grant had been admitted, without exception, before the commissioners of the United States ibr the adjustment of claims to lands in Florida, and before the superior court in Middle Florida, without objection as to the mode and form of their proof; the Supreme Court, on an appeal, will not interfere with the question as to the sufficiency of the proof, or the authenticity of the act, relating to the title which had been admitted by the authorities in Florida, which was the tribunal to judge of the evidence. Ibid.

Breward petitioned the governor of East Florida, intending to establish a saw-mill to saw timber in St. John's river, for a grant of five miles square of land, or its equivalent; ten thousand acres to be in the' neighbourhood of the place designated, and the remaining six thousand acres in Cedar Swamp, on the west side of St. John's river, and in Cabbage Hammock on the .east side of the river. The governor granted the land asked for, on the condition that the mill should be built; and the condition was complied with. On the 27th of May, 1817, the surveyor general surveyed seven thousand acres under the grant, including Little Cedar Creek, and bounded on three sides by Big Cedar Creek, including the mill. This grant and survey were confirmed. The United States v. Breward, 16 Peters, 143.

Three thousand acres were laid off on the northern part of the river St. John's, and east of the royal road, leading from the river to St. Mary's, four or five miles from the first survey. This survey having been made at a place not within the grant, was void: but the court held that the grantee is to be allowed to survey under the grant, three thousand acres adjoining the survey of seven thousand acres, if so much vacant land can be found; and patents for the same shall issue for the land, if laid out in conformity with the decree of the court in this case. Ibid.

In 1819, two thousand acres were surveyed in Cedar Swamp, west of the river St. John's, at a place known by the name of Sugartown. This survey was confirmed. Ibid.

Four thousand acres, by survey, dated April, 1819, in Cabbage Hammock, were laid out by the surveyor general. This survey was confirmed. Ibid.

By the eighth article of the Florida treaty, all grants of lands made before the 24th of January, 1824, by his Catholic majesty, were confirmed; but all grants made since the time when the first proposal by his majesty for the cession of the country was made, are declared and agreed by the treaty to be void. The survey of five thousand acres having been made at a different place from the land granted, would if confirmed be a new appropriation of so much land, and void if it had been ordered by the governor of Florida; and of course it is void, having nothing to uphold it but the act of the surveyor general. Ibid.

In the superior court of East Florida, the counsel for the claimant offered to introduce testimony in regard to the survey of three thousand acres; and the counsel of the United States withdrew his objection to the testimony. The admission of the evidence did not prove the survey to have been made. Proof of the signature of the surveyor general to the return of survey made the survey prima facie evidence. Ibid.

The proof of the signature of Aguilar to the certificate of a copy of the grant by the governor of East Florida, authorizes its admission in evidence; but this does not establish the validity of the concession. To test the validity of the survey, it was necessary to give it in evidence; but the survey did not give a good title to the land. Ibid.

The United States have a right to disprove a survey made by the surveyor general, if the survey on the ground does not correspond to the land granted. Ibid.

On a petition from Pedro Miranda, stating services performed by him for Spain, governor White, the governor of East Florida, on the 26th November, 1810, made a grant to him of eight leagues square, or three hundred and sixty-eight thousand six hundred and forty acres of land on the waters of Hillsborough and Tampa Bay, in the eastern district of Florida. No survey was made under this grant while Florida remained a province of Spain, nor was any attempt made to occupy or survey the land, until after the cession of Florida jo the United States. In 1821, it was alleged that a survey was made by a surveyor of East Florida. Held, that the grant was void; no land having been severed from the public domain previous to the 24th January, 1818, and because the calls of the grant are too indefinite for N locality to be given to them. The United States v. Miranda, 16 Peters, 153.

The settled doctrine of the Supreme Court, in respect to Florida grants, is, that grants embracing a wide extent of country, or with a large area of natural or artificial boundaries, and which granted lands were not surveyed before the 24th of January, 1818, and which are without such designation as' will give a place of beginning for a survey, are not lands withdrawn from the maps of vacant lands, ceded to the United States in Florida, and are void; as well on that account as for being so uncertain that locality cannot be given to them. Ibid.

On the 6th of April, 1816, a grant was made by the governor of Florida, of five miles square, or sixteen thousand acres of land, on condition that a mill should be built. The grant of six thousand acres was for land on Doctor's branch, where the mill was intended to be erected. The ten thousand acres were granted on the north-east side on the lagoon and of India river. The six thousand acres were surveyed in 1819, on Doctor's branch, and the mill was built. The survey under this grant was confirmed. The United States u. Low et al. 162.

According to the strict ideas of conforming a survey to a location, in the United States, the survey of ten thousand acres should be located adjoining the natural object called for, there being no other to

Commission- before tlie judge of the territorial court at Pensacola, or some other authoerSh,0fctake a° ri*y in his absence, competent to administer it, take an oath faithfully to discharge the duties of their offices, and shall commence and hold their sessions on or before the first Monday of July next, at Pensacola, and on the first

aid and control the general call; and therefore, the head of the lagoon would necessarily hare formed one boundary. But it is obvious, more latitude was allowed in the province of Florida, under the government of Spain. The surveyor general having returned that the survey was made according to the grant, and in the absence of other contradictory proof, the claim was confirmed. Ibid.

A grant of five miles square, or sixteen thousand acres of land, was made by the Spanish governor of East Florida, at the mouth of the river Santa Lucia. The petition for the grant stated various menu and losses of the petitioner, and asked the grant of five miles square, for the construction of a water saw-mill. The grant was given for the purpose mentioned, "and also paying attention to the services and other matters set forth in the petition." No survey under the grant was made by the surveyor general of Florida; but a survey was made by a private surveyor. The survey did not follow the calls of the grant, and no proof was given that it was made at the place mentioned in the grant. The survey and plat were not made according to the established rules relative to surveys to be made by the surveyor general under such grants. Nor was the plat made with the proportion of land on the river required by the regulations. The superior court of Florida held that the grant having been made in consideration of services rendered by the grantee, as well as for a water saw-mill, it was valid without the erection of the mill; but the survey was altogether void, and of no effect. The decree of the superior court of Florida, by which the grant a»d survey were confirmed, was remanded to the superior court of Florida; that court to order the sixteen thousand acres granted, to be surveyed according to the principles stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court. It has often been held that the authorities of Spain had the power to grant the public domain in accordance with their own ideas of the merits and considerations presented by the grantee; and that the powers of the Supreme Court of the United States extend only to the inquiry, whether, in fact, the grant had been made, and its legal effect when made, in cases where the law by implication introduced a condition, or it was peculiar in its provisions. No special ordinance of Spain introduces conditions into mill grants. The United States r. Hanson, 16 Peters, 196.

The certificate of a private surveyor, that he had permission from the governor of the territory to make a survey of the land granted, is no evidence of the fact. Thero is a marked and wide difference in the effect of the certificate of the surveyor general and of a private individual, who assumes to certify without authority. Ibid.

A grant by a Spanish governor of Florida meant not, as in the states of the United States, a perfect title; but an incipient right, which,when surveyed, required confirmation by the governor. The duty of confirmation by the acts of Congress is deputed to the courts of justice of the United States, in execution of the treaty with Spain. Ibid.

The same credence that was accorded to the return of the surveyor general by the Spanish government, is due to it by the courts of the United States. Plats and certificates, becanse of the official character of the surveyor general, have accorded to them the force and character of a deposition. Ibid.

A grant of fifteen thousand acres by the Spanish governor of East Florida, in consideration of important services performed in behalf of the government of Spain, to George Atkinson, confirmed by the Supreme Court. By the eighth article of the Florida treaty, no grants of land made after the 24th of January, 1818, were valid; nor could a survey be valid on lands other than those authorized by the grant. Still the power to survey in conformity to the concessions existed up to the change of flags. The United States v. Clarke, 16 Peters, 228.

Spain had tho power to make grants founded on any consideration and subject to any restrictions within her dominions. If a grant was binding on that government, it is so on the United States, the successor of Spain. All the grants of land made by the lawful authorities of the king of Spain, before the 24th of January, 1818, were by the treaty ratified and confirmed to the owners of the lands. Ibid.

The grant to Atkinson was for the land he mentioned in his petition, or for any other lands that were vacant. Three surveys were made of the lands within the. quantity granted, not at the place specially mentioned in the grant, but at other places. Held, that these surveys were valid, notwithstanding that they were made at different places. Ibid.

A claim for eight thousand acres of laud in East Florida, founded on a petition of Domingo Acosta to governor Coppinger, made on the 20th of May, 1816. The petition stated that services had been performed by the claimant for the defence, support and advancement of the town of Fernandina, which had never been rewarded. Governor Coppinger gave a decree in favour of the petitioner, " it being the will of the sovereign that the merits of his subjects should be rewarded." The originals of the petition and decree were not produced, they having been lost; but a certificate signed by Don Thomas Aguilar, the secretary of the government, was exhibited, which stated that the copies of the petition and decree, which were given in evidence, had been faithfully drawn from the originals in his office. Four plats and certificates of survey, made by .Clarke, surveyor of the province,' two of which surveys were made before the 24th January, 1818, and one on the 14th February, 1818; another on the 20th January, 1820; were given in evidence without objection, in the court below, to show the location of the land claimed. The decree of the superior court of Florida, in favour of the claimant, waa affirmed. The United States r. Acosta, 17 Peters, 16. S. C. 1 How. 25.

The official certificates of the secretary of the government of Florida, during the dominion of Spain over the territory, after evidence that no originals could be found in the proper office, was sufficient evidence of the copies of the petition and decree of the governor; no proof having been given to contradict or impair the force of the same. Ibid.

The governor of the territory of Florida, as the deputy of the king of Spain, was the sole judge of the merits on which the claim stated in the petition was founded; and he had undoubted power to reward the merits of the grantee. This has been so decided in many cases. Ibid.

Although in the governor's decree, there may be no description of any place where the land granted

Time of the sessions of commissioners, &c.

Notice to be given of the time of the sessions, &c.

Session at St. Augustine to terminate on June 30, 1823.

Commissioners to forward a detail of their proceedings, &c.

Persons, &c. claiming title to lands under any patent, ffcc. dated previously to Jan. 24, ISIS, valid, &c. and not rejected by the treaty ceding the Floridas, to file their claims, &c.

Claims to be recorded.

Fees.

Proviso.

Monday of January thereafter, at St. Augustine, for the ascertaining and determining of all claims to land within said territories; notice of which shall be given, by said commissioners, in some newspaper printed at each place, or if there be no newspaper, at the most public places in said cities, respectively, of the time at which their sessions will commence, requiring all persons to bring forward their claims, with evidence necessary to support them. The session at St. Augustine shall terminate on the thirtieth of June, one thousand eight hundred and twenty-three, when said commissioners shall forward to the Secretary of the Treasury, to be submitted to Congress, a detail of all they have done, and deliver over to the surveyor all the archives, documents, and papers, that may be in their possession.

Sec. 4. And be it further enacted, That every person, or the heirs or representatives of such persons, claiming title to lands under any patent, grant, concession, or order of survey, dated previous to the twentyiburth day of January, one thousand eight hundred and eighteen, which were valid under the Spanish government, or by the law of nations, and which are not rejected by the treaty ceding the territory of East and West Florida to the United States, shall file, before the commissioners, his, her, or their, claim, setting forth, particularly, its situation and boundaries, if to be ascertained, with the deraignment of title, where they are not the grantees, or original claimants; which shall be recorded by the secretary, and who, for his services, shall be entitled to demand from the claimants ten cents for each hundred words contained in said papers so recorded; he shall be also entitled to twenty-five cents foreach subpoena issued: Provided, That if the amount so received shall exceed one thousand two hundred and fifty dollars, which is hereby declared the compensation for his services, the excess shall be reported to the commissioners, and be subject to their disposition; and said commissioners shall proceed to examine and determine on the validity of said patents, grants, concessions, and orders of survey, agreeably to the laws and ordinances heretofore existing of the governments making the grants, respectively, having due regard, in all Spanish claims, to the conditions and stipulations contained in the eighth article of a treaty concluded at Washington, between his Catholic majesty, and the United States, on the twenty-second of February, one thousand eight hundred and nineteen; but any claim not filed previous to the thirty-first day of May, one thousand eight hundred and twenty-three, shall be deemed and held to be void and of none effect: Provided, nevertheless, and be it further enacted, That in all claims submitted to the decision of the commissioners, where the same land, or any part thereof, is claimed by titles emanating both from the British and Spanish governments, the commissioners shall not decide the same, but shall report all such cases, with an abstract of the evidence, to the Secretary of the Treasury.

Sec. 5. And be it further enacted, That the commissioners shall have power to inquire into the justice and validity of the claims filed with them; and shall be, and are hereby, authorized to administer oaths, to compel the attendance of witnesses by subpoenas issued by the Secretary, and the adduction of such testimony as may be wanted; they shall have access to all papers and records of a public nature relative to any land titles within said provinces, and. to make transcripts thereof. They shall examine into claims arising under patents, grants, concessions, and orders

Claims not filed prior to May 31,1823, void.

Proviso.