| United States. Supreme Court - 1845 - 852 str.
...a-judicial decision. But independently of the force of usage, we think the construction is sustainable. When the land' was purchased and paid for, it was...property of the United States, but of the purchaser. He held for it a final certificate, which could no more be cancelled by the United States than a patent.... | |
| Iowa. Supreme Court, George Greene (Reporter) - 1857 - 646 str.
...fully sustained in Carroll T. Safford, 3 Howard US 441, 460. In that case the court held that, "where the land was purchased and paid for it was no longer...property of the United States, but of the purchaser. He held for it a final certificate, which could no more be cancelled by the United States than a patent.... | |
| Illinois. Supreme Court - 1874 - 660 str.
...How. US 459, it was held, that, upon payment for the land, and the issue of the certificate, the land was no longer the property of the United States, but of the purchaser; that, though technically the fee might be ill 59 412 53a 37 1 59 4ia| Syllabus. the United States,... | |
| Georgia. Supreme Court - 1861 - 822 str.
...holder of the certificate, the Court held, that, "When the land was purchased und paid for, it wa8 no longer the property of the United State.s but of the purchaser. He held for it a final certificate, which could no more be cancelled by the United States than a patent."... | |
| Wisconsin. Supreme Court, Abram Daniel Smith, Philip Loring Spooner, Obadiah Milton Conover, Frederic King Conover, Frederick William Arthur, Frderick C. Seibold - 1861 - 774 str.
...SUPERVISORS OUTAOAHIE COUKTT. Where land has been entered, the courts hold, in the cases cited, that it is no longer the property of the United States, but of the purchaser. They say that he has purchased aud paid for it, and holds a final certificate, which can no more be... | |
| 1863 - 796 str.
...presented soon after, which the sub-Treasurer refused to pay, saying that " the money in his custody was no longer the property of the united States, but of the Republic of Louisiana." An ordinance was soon passed, however, authorizing the payment of all drafts... | |
| 1864 - 794 str.
...presented soon after, which the sub-Treasurer refused to pay, saying that " the money in his custody "was no longer the property of the United. States, but of the Republic of Louisiana," In the Convention on the 31st, a resolution was offered to instruct the delegates... | |
| 1864 - 814 str.
...presented soon after, which the sub-Treasurer refused to pay, saying that " the money in his enstody was no longer the property of the United States, but of the Eepublic of Louisiana." An ordinance was soon passed, however, authorizing the payment of all drafts... | |
| William Jewett Tenney - 1865 - 886 str.
...presented soon after, which the sub-Treasurer refused to pay, saying that " the money in his custody was no longer the property of the United States, but of the Republic of Louisiana." CHAPTEE II. >rm£:'M for a Southern Confederacy — Meeting of Congress at... | |
| United States. Supreme Court - 1867 - 732 str.
...important. In Carroll v. Sajford, the court, in speaking of the title under a certificate, says: " When the land was purchased and paid for, it was no...property of the United States, but of the purchaser. He held for it a certificate, which could no more be cancelled than a patent. It is true, if the land... | |
| |