Court Opinion

ID: 9417129
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 20:03:55.660322+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:21:36.351025
License: Public Domain

Mr. Chief Justice Waite,
with whom concurred
Mr. Justice Clifford, dissenting.
• I dissent from this judgment. It is not claimed that, iyhen the defendants entered, Page had title to,the lands on which the hay was cut. • After the judgment of this court in United States v. Vallejo (1 Black, 541), against- the validity of ijhe .“ Soscol ” grant, the lands became public lands of the United. States; and the occupancy of Page from that time., covering as it did' a tract of more than"eight hundred acres, did not, in,my opinión, prevent a peaceable entry by the defendants, in ..good faith, for the purposes of pre-emption. | The case was fairly put to the jury upon that question.