The Donaldsonville chief. [volume] (Donaldsonville, La.) 1871-current, 1877-10-27
History Of the
HOUMAS LAND CLAIM.
BY RoBT. II. BRADFORD.
;Reproduced from Drapeam de Z Asce"sio,',l
CHAPTER ".

k11AI ~
Unless the back concession of the
Holunas tract is perfect title under
the law of nations, or under the treaty
of Paris of Both April, 1893, or is a
confirmed title under an act of Con-
gress, it is void qb iaitio, aud belongs
to the United States under the treaty,
or to the donees or vendees of the
United States.
1t is now clear that no confirmation
of the double concession of the Hou-
mas claim exists. Therefore, the
double concession, being ali inchoate
title, vested in the United States by
the treaty of the Both of April, 1903,
(Fluker u.s. Doughty, Ky Annuat, 673.
Also, II Hennen's Digest, 1862, C. ~
The Houmas claimants are unpro-
tected by the third article of the
treaty. That article is as follows:
Les habitans des Territories cedes seront
ineorpores dams l'Union des Etats Unis, ct
admis, aussitot gull sera possible, d'apres
les principles de la constitution federale, a
la ioTlissance de tous lie dr0its, avantages ct
immunities des citoyens des Etats Unis, ct
en- atteHddJa, lis seront maintenus ct pro-
t6ges dams lie j0uissance de leur Liberties,
qu'ils professent. Public Lands, Y, p. ZIG,
Green's cd.
The guarantees of liberty, property
and conscience end with respect to
any portion of the ceded territory so
soon as that portion becomes one Of
che United States. (Ne1 Orleans as.
Armas, TX Peters, 235, Chief Justice
Marshall delivering the judgment Of
the court. st. Francis Us. Martin, *
Robinson, g. Therefore, on the 9th
of April, 1872, the day of. the admis-
sion of Louisiana into the Union, III
q. S. Stats. at Large, 70l,) the treaty
of Paris ceased to affect the double
concession of the Houmas tract; and
since Congress has not confirmed that
concession, it is public land unless it
is protected by international law.
But no such protection exists. The
treaty of Paris was sale to the
United States of all domain lands.
" Dams la ceSsion fate par Particle
PRECEDENT" says the second article
of the treaty, Sont compris les isles
Gdjacentes, dependencies de Ia Loui
sidne, les e3nptueemeRs ct places pub
lignes, les 'terrains udcans, tous les
bdtimeRs pubIics. ~ Pub. Lands, Y,
276, GREEN'S ed.) OF course the treaty
took effect on the Both of April, 1903.
From the certificates of Andry and
Lafon, already reviewed, it appears
that not line of the double conces-
sion of the H0umas title existed on
the ground during the year 1903. La
fon says, in the cases of Conway and
Donaldson and Scott, that his plats
represent measurements made by him
on the Amite and Iberville in 1868
generally but these measurements
] were very probably made with re-
spect To other claims fronting on those
streams, and at all events being u
mere traverse, or measurement of the
bauE, they were not and could not be
perpetuated by marks on the ground
or timber. Besides, a single line can
not embrace space aud constitute Il
severance. The measurements We're
ptobably made after the Both of April,
1903, the date of the treaty, and after
the subsistence of the annual inunda-
ton from the Mississippi river. and
were possibly made after the goth of
December, 1903, the date of tile de-
livery of the province to the United
States. liars, etc, relating to Public
Lands, II, p. 202.) SO that, the only
approximation to Il severance of the
double concession existing at the date
of the treaty or Of the delivery, con-
sists of two front corners fixed by
Andry ut forty drpeitS from the Mis-
sissippi river, and Il corner fixed by
him on each side line, at the distance
of two dfpeRs from the front corners
respectively. 1t does not appear that
the side liues of the front concession
were marked back to the front cor
ners of the double concession, mol
that tree bearings were taken at those
corners or at the corners two drpeRs
back of the front corners respectively
nor that any portion of the side lines
of the double concession were marked
1t is certain that the front of the
double concession was not surveyed
by ABdry, Lafon or Mariner. Hence
iG appears that on the Goth of Decenl.
Der. 1903, the 10000 acres constitu
ting the donble concession as claimed
were embraced by four aipeRS of run
ming; that the claim of Clark had no
IL line or corner around it, and tina
the claim of Conway, and that o.
Donaldson aud Scott which consti
tute tile extreme sides of the double
concession, were totally .unsurveyed
excepting two arpeas on the uppe
side of Donaldson aud Scott, and tw,
arpeaS on the lower side of Conway
The concession, therefore, is void al
iaitio, for yagueness or for want of {
severance. On the Goth of December
1903, it had no established front o
rear lines, aud the rear line has neve
been ascertained and is not ascertain
able. The claimants now say tina
the Amite and Manehae are their rea
lines, but their titles do not say so
At the dates of Maurice Conway's pc
tition, of the order of survey, of An
dry's certificate and of Galvez' grant
these streams were very notorious
History informs us that they cousti
|. - M