Savannah morning news., 1886-05-10
AN OLD GRANT.
The Title to the Oakland Park, Metairie
Cemetery and swamp Lands in New
Orleaua

Orleans.
From the Times Democrat
Information was received in this city
Tuesday to the effect that the Hon. l.. Q.
G. Lamar, Secretary of the Interior, had
reversed the proceedings of the compro-
mise land office here in the celebrated
case OF the Canal and Banking Company
VS.. the State of Louisiana ct al.
This case pertains TO the validity of two
French grants to L. G. LeBretou in 1857
and 1894. under which the Canal and
Banking Company claim quantity OF
land in the rear Of the city OF New Or
leans. embracing the Oakland Park,
owned by George l.. Bright, Esq, and the
Metairie Cemetery, owned by the Meta
irie Company, and are purchasers from
the Canal and Banking q CImpany. The
whole comprises about 1,200 acres. 1t
seems this land was surveyed by Zulakow-
ski in 1871 and 1872 20 public land, be-
longing TO the United states, and so shown
on the maps OF thie surveyor and that of
Grandjean-
Iu 1919 It weB purchased by Dr. Smythe
as swamp land lnuring to the State of
Louisiana under the act of Congress
granting all such lands to the State, in
March, 1919. The Canal and Banking
Company claimed these lands under the
French grants 10 LeBIetOn. as before
mentioned. In 1879 the commissioner Of
the general land office declared these
grants to be incomplete. An appeal was
taken from this decision 10 Mr.. Teller.
at that time Secretary OF the Interior,
who decided that, from the evidence pre-
sented TO him, he considered the grant
complete. A year afterward he ordered
A rehearing of the case before the Regis
ter and Receiver OF the district land Office
here. Tnis hearing went 10 prove that
the Canal and Banking Company did not
bold from the alleged grants to LeBreton.
The Commissioner OF the Land Office.
however, held that as Mr.. Teller had de-
cided the grants to he complete the claim
of The State of Lou siana should be can
ceed and held for naught. From this de-
cisi"n an appeal was taken TO Secretary
Lamar, who has just reversed the hold
Ing, or rather the opinion OF the Commits
sioner in reference to the claim OF the
State. This is really the sum total OF the
decision as just rendered by the depart
ment, but, as will be seen, is favOrabl to
DIR. Smvthe. the claimant from the State,
and places him on a more solid footing ia
the premises.
The question at issue, involving the
validity OF the French grants under tine
treaty OF sessions OF 1913, OF course can
only be definitely settled by the Supreme
Court of the United States. and when tue
Land Ottice. so far as its jurisdiction lies.
has decided the case. the rights Of claim
ants will be contested in the courts. The
property being Of cons derable value, say
about 100000, obligation" in the words
OF DR.. Smythe, "will draw its slow length
along, andprobablY be ultimately decided
about the next centennial"
A nice legal point sOuuht to be made in
the case is whether French grant Of
1864, made, as IL Is stated, two years after
the treaty of Fontaiubleau, will be recOg-
nized by the Supreme Court as valid
grant. Itis further asserted that the land
in dispute is wholly covered by this grant.
The court has hed that such grants must
have been recognized and approved by
spain. These are among the questions
that can only be decided by the supreme
Court.