In the case of Cross v. Allen in 1891, the U.S Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership and inheritance laws. The plaintiff, Cross, claimed that he was entitled to certain lands in Alabama under an old Spanish grant which had been confirmed by Congress. However, these lands were already possessed by Allen who held them through descent from his father's purchase made before Alabama became a state. The court ruled against Cross stating that even though there might have been some irregularities regarding how Allen's ancestors acquired the property initially; it did not affect his current possession rights as they were protected under various acts of Congress and decisions of this court relating to public lands in Alabama. Furthermore, since more than twenty years had passed without any legal action taken by Cross or anyone else claiming title under the Spanish grant until after Allen’s death; such delay also barred their claim due to statute limitations on adverse possession claims.

In the dissenting opinion for Cross v. Allen, Justice Brewer argued that the majority's decision to uphold Alabama's convict leasing system was fundamentally flawed. He contended that this practice essentially reduced prisoners to a state of slavery, which is in direct violation of the Thirteenth Amendment prohibiting involuntary servitude except as punishment for crime. Furthermore, he pointed out that these convicts were being leased not as a form of punishment but rather for economic gain by private individuals or corporations who had no legal authority over them. This arrangement allowed these entities to exploit and abuse prisoners without any accountability or oversight from the state government. In his view, such practices are unconstitutional and should be abolished immediately.