Amador weekly ledger., 1858-04-03


of pre-emption. And both the grantee and
the pre-emptioner are contracting parties
with the Government This, / think, | can
show SO satisfactorily as to place the PROPOSE
tion beyond the peradventure of cavi Now,
let us examine First, as to the grantee
BY the laws of Congress certain conditions
and duties are imposed upon him. These
must be complied with and performed before
any right or title can be established; nor can
he acquire any title until then. When he
satisfies the acquisitions Of this law, then in
consideration of his former relation to his
own government, from whom the United
States derive title, the United States, pursu-
ant to agreement, convey by patent, the legal
title. And when the patentee receives his
patent, then, and not till then, does he pos
ses the title. If he fails to comply with the
requirements of the law, he can never obtain
the fee simple to the land. Then there is
something for him to do. Do not all these
proceedings between the grantee and the
government form contract | think they
do. Then the parties are contracting parties.
All persons holding land, by virtue of grant,
must be included within the meaning Of this
theory. And to whether they hold adversely
to each other or not.
have said that pre-emptioners were con-
tracing parties. Let us now see whether it
is true As l have said the United States
were the only owners Of the lands, in this
State, prior to the issuing of patents. Well,
it is their policy to dispose of those lands to
the industrious agriculturist, that they may
thereby enrich their Golfers They, therefore,
say to their citizens, go on all lands that you
find vacant and occupy the same, and improve
it, and in due season. when we shall have
made an apportionment thereof, file with the
register of public lands, your declaratory
statement of your intention to pre-empt, and
at the proper time we will give you an OPP
portunity to purchase the same at the mini
mum price of 81, % per acre. You shall have
the right to become the purchaser of l60
acres on these terms. The parties are COM
petent to contract. There is an assent on the
part of both parties, when the settler locates
upon the land. The consideration is sufficient
to support a contract. There is a benefit to
the one; and, if there be default ON the part
of the other, there is an njury-the settler
is the injured party. This alone would make
the obligation binding But there is some
thing more the United States is to receive
a valuable consideration, namely The sum
Of 81 ,25 per acre. Then is this not an ex-
ecutory contract 7 Until there is default on
the part of the pre-emptioner, the govern
ment is, in law, equity and good faith bound
to consummate the contract. Is the pre-emp-
toner then not contracting party L
think that have shown that the pre-emption-
er and the grantee are contracting parties,
and hence stand in the same relation to the
) United States And if SO, their rights are
to be determined as between themselves In
accordance with the relation they sustain to
each other Now who is the third person con-
templated by law? Isit the Mexican grantee
who claims adversely to the claimant2 II
"Amador" be correct this cannot be so, be
cause be claims under the government. 1;
f he the pre-emptioner "Amador" says not
and for the reason just mentioned Who il
! it then? ? Pray tell me. Who can have any
t adverse interest? No one. And the con
D clusion that / come to is that "Amador" i:
e mistaken; and that the pre-emptioner or any
n person who has or claims to have any inter
(; est in land can investigate the same in the
n tribunals Of the State More anon.
/? CADMUs