United States v. Drummond, 38 U.S. (13 Pet.) 84 (1839)

*United States, Appellants, v. William Drummond, Appellee. [*84

A concession was made by the governor of Florida, before Florida was ceded to the United States, on the condition that grantee should ereet a water saw-mill, “ and with the precise condition, that until he executes the said machinery, the grant to be considered void, and with « out effect, until that event takes place the mill was never erected, and no sufficient reason shown for its non-erection. The court held, that the concession gave no title to the land.

Appeal from the Superior Court of East Florida.

Grundy, Attorney-General of the United States, submitted this case to the court, alleging, that the claimant relied on a concession made by Governor Coppinger for 16,000 acres of land, dated September 12th, 1816. The grant was upon a condition, namely, the erection of a water saw-mill; “ and with the precise condition, that until he executes said machinery, this grant will be considered as null and void, and without effect or value until that event takes place,” &c. The mill was never erected. No sufficient reason was shown for its non-erection.

It was insisted, that the erection of the mill was a condition precedent-j and consequently, that until the claimant showed a performance of that condition, or some reason for non-performance, which would satisfy the terms of the eighth article of the treaty ceding Florida to the United States, he had no title in law or equity.

Ihis case is believed to be fully decided against the claimants, by the

°f court at its last term, in the cases of the United States v. Pius’s Heirs, 12 Pet. 215, and United States v. Kingsley, Ibid. 476.

United States v. Burgevin.

Wayne, Justice, delivered the opinion of the court.—This case, like that of the United States v. Andrew Burgevin (post, p. 85), is controlled by the decision of this court in the case of the United States v. Kingsley, 12 Pet. 476. The decree of the superior court of East Florida is, therefore, reversed.

This cause came on to be heard, on the transcript of the record from the superior court for the district of East Florida, and was argued by counsel: On consideration whereof, it is the opinion of this court, that the petitioner having failed to fulfil the condition of the grant, the said grant or concession is null and void ; and that the said petitioner has no right or title to the land. Whereupon, it is now here decreed and ordered by this court, that the decree of the said superior court in this cause be and the same is hereby reversed and annulled ; and that this cause be and the same is hereby remanded to the said superior court, with directions to enter a decree in conformity to the opinion of this court.