Portis v. Hill
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Austin. The grant to James Cummings was completed by the act of possession on the 16th of August, 1824; the deed from Cummings to James E. B. Austin was dated February 5th, 1825. There was evidence that the land had been continuously cultivated from 1824 to the present time, by persons claiming under Cummings.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Austin. The grant to James Cummings was completed by the act of possession on the 16th of August, 1824; the deed from Cummings to James E. B. Austin was dated February 5th, 1825. There was evidence that the land had been continuously cultivated from 1824 to the present time, by persons claiming under Cummings. One of the defendants’ pleas set up as a defence, that the conveyance to James E. B. Austin was really and in fact for the sole use, benefit and behoof of Stephen F. Austin who was empressario of the colonial grant to him by that name; that the said conveyance was thus…
1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, J.
It is objected to the deed of the 5th of February, 1825, that it evidences a sale made before the expiration of two years from the date of the original grant, and before cultivation ; and is therefore void.
The 22d Article of the Colonization Law of 1823, (1 White, 588,) declares that, “the date of the concession of lands con“stitutes an inviolable law, for the right of property and legal “ ownership.” The consequence of such right of property and *71legal ownership, is the power of alienation. And there is no inhibition in the law of 1823, express or implied, of the right to alienate, at any…
2Cited by21 opinions
- De La Vega v. LeagueTexas Supreme Court · 1885
- Burleson v. BurlesonTexas Supreme Court · 1866
- Gullett v. O'ConnorTexas Supreme Court · 1881
- Converse v. RingerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1894
- Howard v. ColquhounTexas Supreme Court · 1866
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.