Stephen Johnson Field

Name: San Francisco v. Le Roy — Opinion of the Court
Author: Stephen Johnson Field

San Francisco v. Le Roy — Opinion of the Court

Summary

“San Francisco v. Le Roy — Opinion of the Court”, is a work by Stephen Johnson Field. It explores elements such as San Francisco, the United States and pueblo.

Quotes from San Francisco v. Le Roy — Opinion of the Court (Stephen Johnson Field)

Stephen Johnson Field, San Francisco v. Le Roy — Opinion of the Court

“ The duty of the government, and its power in the execution of its treaty obligations to protect the claims of all persons, natural and artificial, and of course of the city of San Francisco as successor to the pueblo, were superior to any subsequently acquired rights or claims of the state of California, or of individuals. The confirmation of the claim of the city necessarily took effect upon its title as it existed upon the acquisition of the country. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Stephen Johnson Field, San Francisco v. Le Roy — Opinion of the Court

“ When the United States acquired California it was with the duty to protect all the rights and interests which were held by the pueblo of San Francisco under Mexico. The property rights of pueblos, equally with those of individuals, were entitled to protection, and provision was made by congress in its legislation for their investigation and confirmation. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Stephen Johnson Field, San Francisco v. Le Roy — Opinion of the Court

“ When our forces took possession of San Francisco, citizens of the United States were appointed by the naval and military commanders to act in the place of the Mexican officers of the pueblo, and they exercised a like authority, which they supposed was invested in them, in making various grants of land in the city. Many persons then there, and many who subsequently settled in California, disputed such authority, and took up and occupied any land which they found vacant within the limits of the pueblo. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Stephen Johnson Field, San Francisco v. Le Roy — Opinion of the Court

“ It was the law of Mexico that pueblos or towns, when once recognized by public authority, became entitled, for their benefit and that of their inhabitants, to the use of lands constituting the site of such pueblos or towns, and adjoining territory, to the extent of four square leagues, to be measured off and assigned to them by officers of the government. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Stephen Johnson Field, San Francisco v. Le Roy — Opinion of the Court

“ The lands which passed to the state upon her admission to the Union were not those which were affected occasionally by the tide, but only those over which tide-water flowed so continuously as to prevent their use and occupation. To render lands tidelands which the state by virtue of her sovereignty could claim, there must have been such continuity of the flow of tide-water over them, or such regularity of the flow, within every 24 hours, as to render them unfit for cultivation, the growth of grasses, or other uses to which upland is applied. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Stephen Johnson Field, San Francisco v. Le Roy — Opinion of the Court

“ If there were no reservations, as specified in the ordinance, the fact should have been established by the public records of the city and county. Its property reserved by statute from private ownership for public uses is not to be sacrificed or lost upon loose verbal testimony of the character offered. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Stephen Johnson Field, San Francisco v. Le Roy — Opinion of the Court

“ Section 2 of an order of the common council, passed on the 16th of October, 1856, which was ratified by the same legislative act of the state which confirmed the Van Ness ordinance, provides that the grant or relinquishment of title made by that ordinance in favor of the several possessors of the land should take effect as fully and completely for the purpose of transferring the city's interest, and for all other purposes whatsoever, as if deeds of release and quitclaim had been duly executed and delivered to the parties individually and by name ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Stephen Johnson Field, San Francisco v. Le Roy — Opinion of the Court

“ A brief statement of the principal facts only will be necessary to an intelligent disposition of the questions presented for consideration. When California was occupied by the forces of the United States in 1846 there was a Mexican pueblo at San Francisco ”

Stephen Johnson Field

Summary

Quotes from San Francisco v. Le Roy — Opinion of the Court (Stephen Johnson Field)

Common terms

Similar works

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature