Matthews v. Baker

36 Ala. 186
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedJanuary 15, 1860
StatusPublished

This text of 36 Ala. 186 (Matthews v. Baker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Matthews v. Baker, 36 Ala. 186 (Ala. 1860).

Opinion

A. J. ■’WALKEK, C. J.

Conceding that the entire evidence which was before the court below appears to be presented by the record, and that we can therefore revise the charge upon the effect of the evidence, we must decide the question of title against the defendant. Under the act of congress of 11th August* 1848, the legislature had the privilege of locating five hundred thousand acres of land, less the amount previously received. — 9 U. S. Stat. at Large, 281; 5 ib. 455. The only evidence of a location of the land in controversy is a certificate, under which the defendant claims, signed by the governor, and countersigned by the secretary of state. The act of the legislature of this State of 13th February, 1850, authorizes the issue of certificates by fhe comptroller, or a locating agent; and it may be (though we do not decide the point) that the certificate of the comptroller or locating agent would be prima-facie evidence that the State had selected the land mentioned in the certificate. It is clear, however, that neither the governor nor secretary of state had any authority to issue any such certificate. — Pamphlet Acts of 1849-50, p. 82. The governor’s certificate of purchase, being issued without authority, could not evidence a selection of the land by the State; and until the land was selected by the State, the title remained in the general government, and was subject to entry at the proper land-office of the United States. There was, therefore, no error in the charge given by the court.

This view of the question of title renders it unnecessary to consider the questions of evidence made by the appellant, as they could not affect the result.

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
36 Ala. 186, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matthews-v-baker-ala-1860.