Summary

Portrait of Samuel Freeman Miller Samuel Freeman Miller Glasgow v. Baker — Opinion of the Court

When the defendants have proved that the land in controversy either belonged to the 'Grand Prairie Common Field of Saint Louis,' or that the lots in dispute had been inhabited, cultivated, or possessed prior to 1803, it would be a very harsh rule to require one who claims to have purchased the title arising from such occupation, cultivation, or possession to prove with certainty and precision the time when and the person who cultivated or occupied that precise property 80 or 90 years ago. Those who could testify from actual knowledge are, perhaps, all dead.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Samuel Freeman Miller Samuel Freeman Miller Glasgow v. Baker — Opinion of the Court

But a title by statute cannot be thus criticised. It sufficiently describes the land intended to be granted, and the class of persons to whom it is granted. Besides, it is not a donation, or mere gift, requiring a survey to sever it from other lands of the donor; but, rather, a deed of confirmation to those who are admitted to have just claims. It passes a present title, proprio vigore, of the property described to the persons designated. A patent to another afterwards for any of these lands would be void, because the government had already released all title and claim thereto.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature