1. The Act of March 3, 1857, 11 Stat. 251, confirmed to the
several states their selections of swamp lands, which had then been
reported to the Commissioner of the General Land Office so far as
the lands were then "vacant and unappropriated and not interfered
with by an actual settlement" under existing laws.
2. The selections so confirmed could not be set aside, nor could
titles to any of the land which they embraced, unless it came
within the exceptions mentioned in that act, be thereafter conveyed
by the United States to parties claiming adversely to the swamp
land grant.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
Page 97 U. S. 346
MR. JUSTICE MILLER delivered the opinion of the Court.
This was an action in the nature of ejectment brought by Marks,
the plaintiff below, who asserted title under the Swampland Act of
Sept. 28, 1850, and the earlier Act of March 2, 1849, in regard to
the same class of lands in the State of Louisiana. The defendant
relied on a patent from the United States dated May 20, 1873. The
evidence of plaintiff's title under the act of 1850, which is all
we shall now consider, is as follows:
"
NORTHWESTERN DISTRICT, LA."
"A. -- List of swamp land unfit for cultivation, selected as
inuring to the State of Louisiana under the provisions of an Act of
Congress approved 28th September, 1850, excepting such as are
rightfully claimed or owned by individuals."
"To. 20 N., R. 14 W., west side of Red River"
-----------------------------------------------------
Estimated
Parts of section Section Area area Remarks
-----------------------------------------------------
All of . . . . . 7 640.00
-----------------------------------------------------
"SURVEYOR GENERAL'S OFFICE"
"DONALDSONVILLE, LA., May 18, 1852"
"Examined and approved."
"(Sig.) R. W. BOYD"
"
Surveyor-General, La."
To this was attached a certificate of S. S. Burdett,
Commissioner of the General Land Office, dated Department of the
Interior, General Land Office, April 30, 1875, that the foregoing
was truly copied from a list of the swamp lands returned to that
office by the Surveyor General of Louisiana. This was followed by
sufficient evidence of title under the State of Louisiana. Neither
this certificate nor any thing in the record shows precisely when
this list was filed in the General Land Office at Washington.
In
Emigrant Company v. County of Wright, supra, p.
97 U. S. 339, we
had occasion to comment on the failure of the Secretary of the
Interior to make out and certify to the states lists of the swamp
lands to which they were severally entitled, and the
Page 97 U. S. 347
expedients to which they were compelled to resort to obtain the
evidence of their title to those lands. We also held in previous
cases that when this was ascertained and the lands were identified
by proper authority, the title related to the date of the grant,
namely, Sept. 28, 1850, and superseded any subsequent grant or
evidence of title issuing from the United States.
Railroad
Company v. Smith, 9 Wall. 95;
French v.
Fyan, 93 U. S. 169.
The above certificate of what took place in the office of the
surveyor general shows what was the course adopted in Louisiana to
secure the identification and lists of swamp lands in that state,
and a similar course was elsewhere pursued. But these selections,
though approved by the surveyor general, who was merely a local
officer, still lacked the authentication of the Secretary of the
Interior, to whom alone Congress had confided the duty of
confirming them, or making them for himself.
It will be observed that the selection in the present case was
approved by the surveyor general in May, 1852. It seems that, seven
years after the passage of the swamp land grant, this failure of
the Secretary to act had become a grievance for which Congress
deemed it necessary to provide a remedy by the Act of March 3,
1857, 11 Stat. 251, which declares that the selection of swamp and
overflowed lands granted to the states by the act of 1850,
heretofore made and reported to the Commissioner of the General
Land Office, so far as the same shall remain vacant and
unappropriated and not interfered with by an actual settlement
under any existing law of the United States, be and the same are
hereby confirmed, and shall be approved and patented to the states
in conformity to the provisions of said act.
If the paper signed by the surveyor general, dated May 18, 1852,
was on file in the General Land Office at Washington, March 3,
1857, we have no doubt that the act completed and made perfect the
title of the State of Louisiana to the land in controversy. If this
were so, the title of the plaintiff below was superior to the
patent issued subsequently to the defendant, for after the passage
of that act, the Land Department had no right to set aside the
selections. The approval of them and the issue of patents to the
state were mere ministerial acts,
Page 97 U. S. 348
in regard to which that department had no discretion unless it
was found that the lands were not vacant or had been actually
settled on adversely to the swamp land claim. The act of 1850 was a
present grant, subject to identification of the specific parcels
coming within the description, and the selections confirmed by the
act of 1857 furnished this identification and perfected the
title.
But, as we have said, there is in the record no conclusive
evidence that this selection was on file in the General Land Office
at the passage of the act. It had been filed with and approved by
the surveyor general in Louisiana in 1852, and was found in that
office when a copy was applied for in 1875. If objection had been
taken to this defect of proof on the trial, the plaintiff would
probably have been required to show when this list was reported to
the commissioner. But no such objection was then made. Sitting here
as an appellate court, two removes from that which tried the case
originally, we hold 1, that the jury or the court, if the latter
tried the issue of fact, had a right to presume that the surveyor
general did his duty, and forwarded this list to the General Land
Office some time between May, 1852, and March 3, 1857, and, 2, that
this question of evidence is not of that federal character which
authorizes us to review the decision of the Supreme Court of
Louisiana upon it.
Judgment affirmed.