It seems clear to us, however, that there is no foundation for the alleged right of entry in the name of the complainant, because it does not appear either that any evidence was offered in the Land Office, tending, to show that the complainant was the then rightful successor to the rights of Morrison, or that such rigtful succession was by the land officers adjudged in his favor without evidence!

Cunningham v. Ashley, 7 Ark. 296 (Arkansas, July 1, 1851)

Times reported as typo: 0