Farrington v. Wilson
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from tbe Circuit Court for Dane County. Action for tbe recovery of real estate situated in that county, to wbicb tbe plaintiff claims title in fee. Tbe defendants deny generally tbe allegations of tbe complaint, and claim title in themselves.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from tbe Circuit Court for Dane County. Action for tbe recovery of real estate situated in that county, to wbicb tbe plaintiff claims title in fee. Tbe defendants deny generally tbe allegations of tbe complaint, and claim title in themselves. To sustain bis title, tbe plaintiff offered in evidence tbe treaty made August 1,1829, between tbe United States and tbe Winnebago tribe of Indians, by tbe fifth article of wbicb tbe United States agreed to grant to Antoine Grignon, a half breed member of that tribe, one section of land, “ tbe same not to be leased or sold by said grantee to any…
1Opinion of the CourtDixosr, C. J.
The validity of the restriction found in the treaty, and contained in the patent of the land by the United States to Antoine Grignon, “ not to be leased or sold by the grantee to any person or persons whatever without the permission of the President of the United States,” is unquestionable. The law on this subject is thus summed up by the supreme court of the United States in a recent case: “ With respect to the public domain the constitution vests in congress the power of disposition, and of making all needful rules and regulations. Thai power is subject to no limitations. Congress has the…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Chupco v. ChapmanSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1917
- Hancock v. Mutual Trust Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1909
- Hilgers v. QuinneyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1881
- Perkinson v. ClarkeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1908
- Clark v. AkersSupreme Court of Kansas · 1876
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.