Skip to main content
Supreme Court· 2/21/1916

United States v. Morrison

Citations

  • 240 U.S. 192
  • 36 S. Ct. 326
  • 60 L. Ed. 599
  • 1916 U.S. LEXIS 1442

Syllabus

<p>•The State of Oregon did not, under § 4 of the Act of February 14,1859, c. 33, 11 Stat. 383, take title to sections 16 and 36, thereby granted prior to survey; but, until defined by survey and title had vested in • the State, Congress had power to dispose of them oh compensating the State for the resulting deficiency. ...</p> <p>Surveying the public lands, is an administrative act, confided by statute to designated officers of the United States who have power to direct how the surveys shall be made; and, until all requirements shall have been fulfilled, a survey is not a completed official act.</p> <p>Nothing in the Act of February 14, 1859, or in Rev. Stat., § 2275, as amended by the Act of February 28, 1891, operated to pass title to the State of Oregon of sections 16 .and 36 at any intermediate stage of the survey, or imposed any limitations on the authority of Congress' to dispose of such lands before title passed to the State upon a survey duly completed according .to authorized regulations of the Land Department.</p> <p>A survey is incomplete until formally approved by the Commissioner; and even though approved without modification it does not so relate back to the date of the grant or of the field survey as to destroy the power of Congress to dispose of the land while unsurveyed.'</p> <p>Authority to establish the Cascade Range Forest Reservation given to the President by the Acts of March 3, 1891, and June 4, 1897, included the power to make temporary withdrawals, and a properly made order of the Secretary of the Interior withdrawing lands must be regarded as an act of the President.</p> <p>The disposition of public lands by the President under the authority of Congress is a disposition by Congress.</p> <p>The exception in the proclamation of January 15, 1907, enlarging the Cascade Range Forest Reserve did not include sections 16 and 36 in townships in Oregon referred to in § 4 of the Enabling Act of 1859 but which had not been included in a completed sur

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • concluding that language similar to the Organic Act in the congressional act creating the Territory of Oregon meant that title did not immediately vest in Oregon and that \Congress was at liberty to dispose of the land\ until \the sections were defined by survey\
  • concluding that language similar to the Organic Act in the congressional act creating the Territory of Oregon meant that title did not immediately vest in Oregon and that “Congress was at liberty to dispose of the land” until “the sections were defined by survey”
  • “[p]rior to survey, ... designated sections were undefined and the lands were unidentified”
  • the Oregon Admission Act, 11 Stat. 383 (1859)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Hughes, McReynolds

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

45 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.