ventory and appraisement. It was inventoried and appraised. In the inventory is placed a single article of lands, in these words, are placed in the inventory the lands of this habitation. whose extent cannot be calculated immediately, on account of nis having sold many lots; but Mr. N. Gravier informs us that its bounds go to the forks of the bayou, according to the titles.' And in the appraisement also there is but this same single article of lands, thus described, about thirteen arpents of land, of which the habitation is estimated, including the garden, of which the most useful part is taken off in front, the residue consisting of the lowest part, [to wit, that descending back to the bayou,] the side being sold to Navarro, one Percy, and the negro Zambo, a portion of which, &c. estimated at 190 D. the front acre, with all the depth, which makes 2470 D.' Then follows the adjudication, which adjudges to John Gravier the effects, real estate, moveables and slaves which have been inventoried as belonging to the estate of his deceased brother Bertrand Gravier, &c. Report 9. 10. We see, then, that no lands were inventoried but the thirteen arpents in front, composing the inhabitation. And it is impossible that that term should be meant to include the beach of the river, cut off from it by the intervention of the whole Fauxbourg of seven ranges of squares; or that they should not have used a more obvious expression, if the idea of the beach had been in their minds. Nobody could consider these two parcels, distant and disjointed as they were, as being one parcel only, one habitation. No man having two farms, or two tracts of land, separated by the lands of others, would expect that by devising or conveying one, the 11* other would pass also. In fact, at that time, neither John Gravier nor any one else, considered the beach as any part of Bertrand Gravier's estate and in the appraisement, they estimate the front arpents, (that is, fronting on the fauxbourg,) with all their depth to the bayou, at 190 dollars, the front arpent; contemplating clearly only what was between the fauxbourg and bayou. Accordingly Fernandez, acting for the Depositor General, the legal officer in those cases, swears that

he took charge and possession of all the estate according to the inventory which had been made from the 28th of June to the 4th of July, 1797; that, in that inventory, the batture never was mentioned, or heard of, as property of Gravier, nor in charge of the Depositor, and that, on delivering the estate to John Gravier, the batture never was spoken of. It is equally certain that had there been an idea that they were smuggling the batture away, through these proceedings, the citizens of New-Orleans would not have been so silent, nor the Governor, the Cabildo and other Spanish authorities so passive, when so active on all former occasions respecting the batture: and that had the batture been under the view of the appraisers, instead of estimating it at 2470 dollars, conjointly with other thirteen arpents, a very different sum must have been named. The batture alone is now estimated at half a million of dollars. But the truth is, that neither John Gravier, nor any one else, at that day, considered it but as public property. And for six years ensuing, he never manifested one symptom of ownership; until Mr. Livingston's arrival there from New-York, with the wharves and slips of that place fresh in his recollection. The flesh-pots of Egypt could not suddenly be forgotten, even in this new land of Canaan. Then John Gravier received his inspiration that the beach was his; and is tempted, by one kind of bargain after another, to try his fortune with it. It was only to lend his name, and receive a round sum if anything could be made of it. To get over the palpable omission of it in the inventory and appraisement, they find a man whose recollection is exactly à propos; a Henry Parisien, a comedian by profession, and a joiner by trade. had been one of the appraisers, 10 years before, and recollected, and so swore that he had walked on the batture, before the closing of the appraisement to ascertain its extent, and be the better able to judge of its value, and that it was through forgetfulness that it had not been taken into the estimate.' Piecès Prob. 33. It happens that nature bears witness against him. From the 20th of June to the 4th of July is within the period of high

Livingston's arrival.

Parisien.

He

*12

and it is proved that, at the very time of the appraisement, the river was still overflowing, and the batture covered with water: *the journals of the sawmills further attest that they did not cease to work till the 25th of August of that year; and when the waters of the river are sufficiently low to stop the mills, all the battures are still covered with water. P. Pr. 34. However even this Henry Parisien swears, that the batture was not in the estimate, and that it was through forgetfulness that it was not.' Examin 19. Rep. 21. Pi. Prob. 33. No matter through what cause, it is enough that it was not in the inventory or estimate, and of course not sold to J. Gravier. This corroborates the testimony of the Depositor, that he neither had it in his charge, nor included it in the estate sold and delivered. J. Gravier must therefore, as to this part of his brother's estate, if his it were, recommence his work, by having a new inventory, appraisement and adjudication. But to repel the present proceeding, it suffices that having made his election to take, not as heir, but purchaser, this beach is not yet his; it is still an hæreditas jacens, and before he can convey it to Mr. Livingston, he must get it by a new process, and make a third bargain.

We will proceed further to trace the history of this acquisition of the batture, by the plaintiff, who writes a letter of lamentations to some member of the government, on the 27th of June, 1809. That Congress will probably adjourn without coming to any decision on the subject of my removal by the late president of the United States from my estate at New-Orleans.' A most ungrateful complaint; for had he not been removed, he must, at the time of writing this letter, have been, as his estate was, some 10 or 12 feet under water; the river being then at its greatest height. And when was this notable discovery made, that the beach of the river was the separate and exclusive property of J. Gravier, clear of all public right to its use? Let us hear the Governor, in answer to this question. In a letter to the Secre tary of State of October 13, 1807, he says, 'early after the arrival of Mr. Livingston in this territory, he became concerned

13*

in the purchase of a parcel of ground fronting the fauxbourg of this city, commonly called the batture, a property which had been occupied as a common by the city for many years previous, and the title to which, in the opinion of the inhabitants was unquestionable.' The day* of the arrival of Mr. Livingston in New-Orleans I do not know; but I recollect he was one of the earliest emigrants to that country, which was ceded to the United States on the 30th of October, 1803. We are told, [Rep. 11. Thierry 5.] it was proved by some oral testimony that J. Gravier began an inclosure of 500 feet square in that year, and completed it in the next. The day of beginning is not stated; but we may safely presume it was not while the French Governor thought the country belonged to his master, and most probably not till after the early arrival of Mr. Livingston.' This enclosure was demolished by an order of the Cabildo of Feb. 22, 1804.† The next step was to make an ostensible deed, to an ostensible purchaser,‡ a Peter de la Bigarre, a brother emigrant of Mr. Livingston's from New York, some old acquaintance. This was dated March 27, 1804, is expressed to be in consideration of 10,000 dollars, and conveys two undivided thirds of all that part or parcel of land, situate on the bank [sur la rive] of the river Missisipi, between the public road and the current of the said river, &c. with a warranty. I call the purchases ostensible, because notwithstanding his pretended purchase, J. Gravier, on the 20th of October, 1805, [Rep. 1.] commenced a suit against the city, as proprietor of the whole, and the court adjudged him proprietor of the whole; and because the same J. Gravier, [Poydr. 3.] by a deed to the same P. de la Bigarre, in which no mention was made of the former, or reference to it, conveys to him on the 14th Dec. 1806, the batture Ste. Marie, along the whole limits of this land, between the road and river, on condition that he shall pay all expenses of the suit depending, with 50,000 dollars in addition; that the property shall remain unsold

Bigarre.

and hypothecated for the purchase money till paid, and that if the law-suit fails, the sale is void, and Bigarre to pretend to no damages for non-execution. It is observable here that neither buyer or seller risked anything. It was a mere speculation on the chance of a law-suit, in which they were to divide the spoils if successful, and to lose nothing if they failed.* It was by our law a criminal purchase of a pretense title, 32. H. 8. 9. and equally criminal by the law of that territory, where I presume the provision of the Roman law is in force, 'qui improbè coeunt in alienam litem, ut quidquid ex condemnatione in rem ipsius redactum fuerit, inter eos communicaretur, lege Juliâ, de vi privatâ, tenentur.' Dig. 47. 8. 6. 4 Blackst. 135. Whosoever shall take part in the suit of another, so that whatever shall be recovered by the judgment is to be divided between them, shall be subject to the Julian law, de vi privata.' By which law, ib. tit. 7. 1. they were to lose one third of their goods, and be rendered infamous. The deed was not only criminal on its face, but was void by an express law of the territory, [a law of Governor Unzaga. Poydras 6. Rep. 25.] and so pro*14 nounced to be on the floor of Congress *by their representative, because not executed before either witnesses or notaries. It was kept secret from its date, till the day before judgment was pronounced, when the parties becoming apprised of the decision which was to be given, (for this was known at least on the 20th of May,) [Governor Claiborne's letter May 20, '07,] produced it, for the first time, to the Notary to be recorded. And the day after its publication, the court, by the opinion of two members against one, [Examen 3.] adjudged the property wholly to the very man, who, if he had ever had any right, had conveyed away two thirds of it, before he brought his action, and Alarm occa- the whole while it was pending. The alarm which this adjudication produced was immediate and great. The fact was notorious that, from the earliest to the latest ex

Decision of
Court.

sioned.

Lafon, in his map of New Orleans, says expressly that the Missisipi, at the city, is uniformly of the breadth of 300 toises only.-MS Note.