Newspaper Page Text
Sfiillíi 'Tf lUf fkln (ftíVfttf I1 E"11' of tlia tract ot laná vincial or suba-dinnto government, appoint oli-
IUUIU Jl . linilj VUillll crilC1 n thodncumcnt of coriocssionj-lho pe- cors tliorc-to. fed devolve unon them the res- Independent in oil things Neutral in nothing W. W. II. DAVIS, EuiTOtt B4ii'i:i)AV, siauc'ii 3, 1S55 LOCAL ITEMS. Opinion ofJudyt Brocehut. Va publish in our p-ipor, thU week, in English, tha nblo opinion uf Ju.lgo Rroeelius l.iteiy delircrcj in l-ho Supremo curt of the million, hi ilia case 01 rmo vs. Halen. 1 lit' questions involved in this ease aro i f great im portarles to a large number of our citizens, nu.l the opiniou, wo doubt not, will lio read with much iiiterestbeingu dear and able expert on of the matters in controversy. There are a lar (to number of land titles in the Territory, in "hieh tin aamo questiuni aro ini olve.t, and any legal doeision, touching their validity, will here' ceivod with deep interest by our people. The Surveyor Genor.il comes clo'thod with authority to examino all ueh claims wlrro there i a dis" puto botweeu individuals nnd the U. S., with di lections to refer them to th: government i.t tt'u hington: but all caeos between individiiuls must bo decided by our courts. Wo commend this o piulon to lho careful p.ruuil of our readers. Arrival of the southern mail. Tin southern mail arrived in Santa Ft Tues day evening Hie 27th ult., being brought by Mr. Cooper on ii mulo. 'Ibero two or throe screws loose in the southern miil arrangements, and we nope trio l'ot Master General will huvo them looked u ft or. Departure of tin Independence mail, Tho until, for lndepenilci.ee Mo. left Sansa Fe Thursday th) first of March, wit Ii two passen gers, lJuo Mnuuol Aivurei uud Mr. Joseph Mcrcuio. -tho pe ' titioner setting forth, in tho petition, the uses ! and purpascs to which ho desired to appropriate the tract or limit for which bo petitioned. Thoso use wero the cultivation of the soil, the pas turing of Docks, tho promotion r.nd encourage ment of industrial pursuits, and, in general, ponsiblerjuty of managing the affairs and supo-rintonJicj"-' be interests of that subordinate go vernment -trithoat taking cognizanoe of tho important jiublio acts of its functionaries. It appeii.3, then, that tho Supreme National government of Mexico acquiesced in tho net of such purposes as looked to tho settlement of , its subordinate authorities, in this province, in ths uninhabited portions of tho provinco, tho making the grant of land hero in question, for enhancement of tho vnluo of the soil, the de velopment ot tho resources of the country, and tho promotion of tho oublic good, It further nppenrj that tho said petition was referred, by tho 6aid Political Chief, Don Bar lomo Daca, to the provincial deputation of the province, for their udvioo and consent it seem ing, thereby, to hnvo buen tho duty of tho snid provincial deputation, to counsel and advice with tho said political chief , in relation to tho propriety and wisdom of unking such grants, the lapso of about twenty five years. Wo aro to construe the silenco of tho supremo authority in reference to tho public acts of its subordinate authorities into an affirmation or approval o those acts. It has not been shown that tho Su premo Aational government did any act, passod any law, or issuod any edict, disavowing gran ts made in this manner, and by these authori ties. It Joes not appear that any thins has been done by tho national government of Mex ico, tending to indicate that she disapproved of If further append, that the saiu provincial , such proceedings; but, on the contrary, thoso deputation, having duly considered tho matters 1 functionaries were permitted, for yo.tr, to go et forth in the petition thus referred to them, ! on, untiintrruptodly, in tho excrciso of such gnvo their agreement antl aCent to tho cotices- , powers. B'virtuo thereof, countless tracts of eioii of the lin ts petitioned for, nud, tliit then, I land are n' ..' possessed by the inhabitants of and not until then, tlio mid political chief, in this Territory, who will tromblo in their homes, "donee thoreof until the contrary pponr, by "tho showing of those who oppoo tho titlo sot "up under it, and deny tho power by which it "professed to bo granted. Without the recog nition of this principio, thero would be no sa "fety in title papers, and no security for the on "joyment of property under them. It is true "that a grant mado without authority, is void "undor all governments 9 Crnr.ch 99; 5 Wheat "ton 303 but, in all, tho question is, on whom "the law throws tho burden of proof, of its ex istence, or non-cxlstcncc. .1 grant is void un 'less tho grantor has tho power to make it but "it is not void bocauso tho grantee does not bo valid if tho said territories had remained within the limits of Mexico." By tho same treaty it is also stipulated that, "Mexican! now established in territories previously belonging to Mexico, and which remain for tho futuro within tho limits of tho United States, as defi ned by the present treaty, shall be free to conti nue whoro they now reside, or to move at tiny timo to tho Mexican Republic, retaining tho property which they possess in said territories, or disposing thereof, and removing the proceeds wherever they pienso." lb. Sec. 8. Tho term property horc, is to be taken in tho most general and liberal sense, as applying to "provo or produoo it, Tho law supplies this : lands as well as to movoahlo possessions. By "proof by legal presumption, arising from the tho word property, as applied to land s, is com "full, legal and completo execution of tho ofli- prchendtd overy species of title, incohnnto or "cial grnnt, under all tho solemnities known or perfect, embracing all thoso rights which lie in "proved to exist, or to bo required by the law j oontr.iet; thoso which are oxeoutory as well aa "of the country where it is made and the laud thoso which are executed. In this respect the the iranio df tho supremo national government made to tho petitioner, Don Juan K. Pino, a grant of tho tract of Innd for which ho peti tioned, nnd for tin purposes for which the said grant was sought. It has already been remarked tint tlio gran tor, Don liarlolomo Ii ici, w..s tho undisputed nnd admitted political chief of tho province of Mew Mexico, at tho time of tho making of such grant, lie held tint office under tho liepublic of Mexico, and it was in that capacity that he made, to Don Juan E. Pino, the grant in ques tion. It is to be presumed that ull of his offi cial acta were legitimate, nnd in conformity to deemed permanent nnd secure, the' ' hall havo learned from tho Opinion ofMhje llrorcliur, ddieertd in the 1,10 wi" ür lllw "r ú" '""reign Pw under ftuprtm Court of the United Stales, for lhcMi ll0 "cl'o!seJ llutlli,1'il.r- Such must Territory of Sew Mexico, in the cuse of Justo ' k" ll"J r"tiun"1 M .,rc"l,I'!ion U"U1 U ;,-.. ,i nil, ii i.. ii. 1 . 1." bo shown that ho transcended his rowers or th. ....,',; nCi ,'( . , ;, );, i- acted in violation of laws bearing upon thesub- wi,h """" "'' Prilnt whlch lia(1 1)0cn 'Ve litkal Chief of the Province of Xeie Muico, ' J hitherto when . .. 1! ....... L 1. "..'I 1 intimation oi court, uy nowirau n tenu re, in tho opinion of this tribunal, thoy hold their possessions. The nurposos for which such grants, as tho onoin question, wero made, being such as look lo tho wcllaro of tho pro vince, tlio dcvclopcmcnt of its resources, and consequently to the interest nnd greatness of the Supremo government, give encouragement and strength to the idea of presumed acquies cence on the part of tho superior power. After the lnpao of nearly twenty five years from the period of this grnnt, this Territory passed from tho ownership of Mexico into that of the United States; nnd, in tho transition from the jurisdiction nnd authority of tho old govern ment, to thoso of the new, the plaintiffs brought brj'ore the ccsiion of the Territory to the U. S I coincide with tho reasoning of the opinion nhieh has been read, on a majority of the po int) discusied; and I concur, fully, in tho judg. ment of tho court, on ull the points involved, far nj it reverses tho ruling of ihe court be low, and remands tho cause fura new trial. 1 regret, however, that 1 have to feel it my duty lo deliver a separato opinion on the most important question involved in the case. I til. lude to the grant, or deed, offered by tho plain tiffi, in the ourt below, as evidence to main ttiu th.'ir action, and by tho court excluded from tho jury; as complained of in the third bill of exception. In deciding that the court below erred in re fusing to allow that grant to go to tho jury, it íe(ni3 rroncr that romo reasons should be ns r n nl, showing that the grant, when it shall be brought to the consideration of the jury, in the new trial, is to havo lomeforoo ami effect; nnd, to indicate tho pri'ieiples which ought to go vern th; construction thereof, when it shall come ti be consi lered, as evidence, in tho ourt bo h'.r. I have to regret that, in this view of the liat' uf this tribunal, I stand unsupported by t!:o oth-T I'.-.-mbers of tho court. This f rant appears to havo been executed by Don 1! irt jlome Bacn, as Supreme Political Chief ef the I'rovinre of New Mexico, under the Su preme National government of tho liepublic of Mexico, with the consent of the national deputa tion of th provine:. It comes before us, as it was beforo tha court below, ns a duly authen ticated copy of the original, bearing the ap pearanca of g-nuincness, nnd seeming to have been executed in due accordance with the forms, ceremonies and solemnities of law. This document of concession, grants to Don Juan T.. Pino, a certain extensive tract of land lying within tho Territory of Aew Mexico, the inctes and boundu whereof ore therein descri bedembracing, as is alleged, tho ranch occu pied by Alexander Hutch, for the possession ot which this nction of ejectment was instituted in llie court below. The plaintiffs in the original caujo aro the lawful heirs of the grantee, Don Juan 11. Pino, and, in tho acfion of ejectment, offered this (;rant as evidenco of their right to recover pos nession. Tho said grant having been rejected, by tho court below, the plaintiffs havo brought tho qucitiun ot its validity to this appellate tribunal. Tho question is one of n very deli cate and important character; and, in view of The presumption, that ho acted within the legitimate scope uf his authority, in mnking the grant, derives strength from the circums tances attending the concession of tho land, from tho incipieiicy to the consummation of the grant. In the first placo, let us look at the petition of the party seeking the grant. It is apparent from the form of tho petition, the considera tion therein set forth, and the motives by which it wns obviously incited, that the petitioner ac ted under tho full conviction that ho was apply ing to Hie true and lawful authority for tho desired grant, The reference of the petition, by the political chief, to the provincial doupta tien, indicates that tho said functionary was disposed, like a faithful public officer, to pro ceed with due deliberation, caro nnd wisdom, in the discharge of a delicate and important pub lic duty, The deliberations of the provincial deputation, and their final nssent to the onces- siou of the land, in conformity to the prayer of the petitioner; the iicceptanco of tho task do volved upon them by the reference of tho pcti tion to their investigation, deliberation, and counsel; and their response, in advising the po- litienl chief to make the lolieitifl grunt, indicate that they were acting in conformity to law, and that the political chief, with whom they thus counsell'fl and advised, acted in pursuance of legal authority, m referring the case to their consideration, and in ultimately making tho concession. Tho 'resumption in favor of tho legality of tlio act of making the grant, derives additional strength from the considerations which moved tho grnntor thereunto. In doing tho net, ho seems to have been influenced by motives that looked to the public weal; such ns the popu lation of the unsettled portions of tho province; the cultivation of the soil; tho enhancement of the value of niljacent lands, belonging to the public domain; the dcvclopcmcnt of tho resour ces of the country, nnd other benefits to the ge neral interest of tho province, which would le gitimately flow from a settlement of the unin habited portions of tho Territory, nnd a spread of industrial pursuits. It is apparent that the consideration! which moved tho grantor, in making the grant, wore founded in a desiro to stimulate tho dormant energies, and develops the latent resources, of tho country. In this ho seems to havo acted tho part uf a faithful pub lic officer, looking not only to the wclfaro of the provinoo over which ho presided, but also to the interest nnu iiggratiiluemeiit ot too supremo the importunes of the princip'cs involved, the i Vutional iroveinment, under whoso authority utent ol property uepenuing upon the result of this cause, and the effect which the final ad judication of this question must havo upon the real estate of a largo portion of tho people uf this Territory, it is natural that I should expe rience some regret, in differing from a majority ul tho Court, in the opinion which I entertain in referenco to this tno'it iuterestng nud impor tant branch of tho case. In tlu investigation of the character of the print in question, nnd in tho application there- uf to this case, wc must inquire, has it emana ted fietn a proper source? Is it duly nuthen tieat' dV H'hat is its legitimate force and ef fect; and, is it such a grant as should command vho protection of tho courts of the country? It ii an indiiputed nnd admitted fact that I,)ii liirtolotno Unoa, the grantor, was, at the time of thi making of the said grant, the duly U'lihoriscd Political Chit f of thi, the then pro vine of tlip Uepublic of Mexico; to whoso wis dimi uní caro, under the advice of the provin cial deputation, was confided tho government un J the interests at this province. ho held his ornee, miel m whose name ho execu ted the grant. I'hcso considerations go strongly lo support the presumption that Don llartolomo Baca, ns political chief ot the province, made this grant bv virtue of authority in him duly invested by the Supreme Aational government of Mexico. This presumption is favored by tho declaration, in the .document of concession, that ho made the grnnt by virtue of the facility to him con ferred, nnd in the name ot the Supremo Aatio nal government. This grnnt appears, from tho record, to havo been made in the year 18'23; twenty five years beforo tho llrpublic of Mexico pnrb'd with the right of soil and her political authority over this Territory, wherein the lunel in question lies, and where tho grant thereof was ma le. This not, ot granting this hind, was, of cour- passcd to the archives of tho government; and it is to be presumed and admitted, that such offi cial functions, when exercised by the high pub. lio authorities of the provincial government, It is before us, upon the record, tluit tho not unknown to tho Supromo Aational o u- grantee, Dull Juan E. Piuo, ou the sixth day I luoritv. It is not to be supposed that a nation ol )cc.uibc, J?;i, petitioned the Juid polili- wal,j, cstnb!lih, within its own domain! n pro- ed nnd maintained, inviolate, for nearly quarter of a century. And they now ask us. if we will not recognize, ns lawful and valid: an net from a high official source, which, for so long a period, had tho unreserved acquics cence of their former sovereign. The Supremo court of tho United States, in tho case ot the United Statos vs. Arredondo and others, 7 Peters COI; recognize the principio as to all public grants of land, or nets of public nlliccrs, in issuing warrants, orders of survey, permission to cultivate or improve, ns evidence of inceptive nnd nascent titles, that tho public acts of public officers purporting to bo exerci sed in an official capacity and by public autho rity, shall not bo presumed to bo usurped, but a legitimate authority previously given, or sub sequently ratified, which is equivalent. In that case it is said, if "it were not a legal prcsi-.mp-"tiou that public and reFponsible officers, claim "ing nnd exercising the right of disposing of tlio "public domain, did it by order and consent of "the government in wlu.se name tho acts wero "done, the confusion and uncertainty of titles "and possessions would be infinite." The same case, page i-S says, "the grants of colonial go. "nors, beforo the revolution, have always been, "nnd yet are taken ns plenary evidenco ot the "grant itself, as well ns authority to dispose of "the public lands. Its actual exercise, without "any evidence of desavowal, revocation, or de "nial by the King, and his consequent acquits- "cence, and presumed ratification, aro sufficient "proof, in tho absenco of nny to tho contrary "(subsequent lo tho grant) of the royal assent "to the exercise of his prersgativo by his local "governors. This or no other court can rcquiro "proof that there exists in every government a "power to disposo of its property; iu tho ah "senco of nny elsewhere, wo aro bound to pre "sumo and consider that it exists in tlio officers "or tribunal who exercises it, by making "grants, nnd that it is fully evidenced by oc cupation, enjoyment, nnd transfers ot propor- "ty, had and mnao under them, without dis "turlwnco by any superior power, respected by "all co-ordinate nnd inferior officers nnd tribu nals throughout the stute, colony, or province "where it lies." The government of tho United Stntes, in nil tho special legislation which it has had in ro- ferenco to grants, by tho former sovereign, of portions o tho domnin over which sho has sub sequently acquired authority and jurisdiction. has always recognized tho principle hero insist ed upon; nd,iu the samo case, (United States vs, .Irredondo and others,) tho Supremo court of tho United States say, in allusion to such le gislation by Congress, that, "in their wholo le gislation on the subject (which has all been "examined) thero has not been found a solita "ry law, which directs that tho authority on "which a grnnt has been made under the Spnn "ish government should bo filed by a claimant "recorded by n publio officer, or submitted to "any tribunal nppointed to adjudicate its valí "dity and tho title it imparted: Congress has "been content that the rights of the United Sta "tes should bo surrendered and confirmed, by ''patent to the claimant, under a grant purport- "ing to havo emanated under nil the officiul "forms aud sanctions ot tho local government. "This is deemed evidenco of their having been "issued by lawful, proper, and legitimate au thority, when unimpeached by proof to the "contrary." In tho same case, tho court say, lho judicial history ot tho landed controver ts situated," Tho grnnt, in this case, comes beforo us, with all tho appearances of havingbeen executed iu conformity to the solemnities and sanctions of law. In that respect it stands uninipeached. In view of tlio foregoing reasoning, nnd au thorities cited, it is clear to ray mind, that this grnnt must be respected as having emanated from a Inwful source; such as would bo recog nized by Congress, in legislation upon the sub ject, and of which tho courts cannot bo regard less. If tho authority by which tho grant was made, is to bo viewed as legitimato nnd bind ing, let us inquire what is tho character and ex tent of tho rights thereby vested in the grantee. It is obvious that tho designs of tho grantor wns to give to the grantee not a mero posses sory, but n permanent right, to tho land grant ed. This intention is evinced and indubitably indicated, by tho instructions or requirements of tlio document of concession, wherein the grantor snys "I have thought proper to grant, "in the nnmo of the Supreme National govern "ment, to Don Juan K. Pino, and oy this do "cuincnt of concession, tho sito which ho soli "cits, on the River Gallina which shall "be called Hacienda lie San Juan Bautista "del Ojito do las Gallinas, with tho known bo "undaries, on tho north the land murks of tho "sito of Don Antonio Oitiz, nnd ilia mesa of "tho Agungo do la Yegua, on the South tho "River Pecos, on tho cast tho Mesa of Pajnri "to, on tho west the points of the mesa Chupai ''nas, in which fixed points ho shall place for- "mal nnd well constructed land marks, to that, "3 all time, the dividing lines of the land? "which have been granted to him may be re "cognized, in order that, in coufonnity with "the laws now in force, or that may be in force, "he may enjoy them for himself and his legiti- "mate heirs." It is not, however, necessary in view of the bearing which this grant should havo hud in the court below, in tho action of ejectment, to de termine whether tlio effect ot thi grant wat to vest in the grantee a titlo in full property to ihe bind therein embraced or only tho right to set tlo nnd possess. That the grunt was sufficient to vest in the grantco tho right ti settle and possess, thero can bo no rational doubt; and there can be no more reason for uncertainly anil doubt ns to the quantity of land, or the extent of the tract over which tho right of the grantee was carried. This right of possession was to tho wholo ot the lands within tho boundaries laid down nnd described in the grant. The pos session of a part of tho truct was, in legal con templation, a possession of tho whole, to tho effect that all other persons entering thereon, without n higher and better right, derived from publio authority, from the granteo himself, or those holding under tho grant, would be there as mere trespassers. It appears, from tho evidence, that the grantee did take possession of the tract of land by the erection ot buildings nnd nctual occupancy of tho same. His right of possession thereby bo- enmu perfected; nnd it was by virtue of that right, that tho action of ojectment was brought in the court beloiv. Is tho right Ihus acquired such ns the courts ot our coontty should protect ? It is a humano and just principio of the law of nations that) relations uf tho inhabitants to tho government aro not changed. Smith v. tho U. S. 10 Pe ters Rep., 320. The scrupulous care and fidelity which our govornment intended to maintain in regard to the rights of property of tho inhabitants of this Territory, is further evinced by tho duty assign ed to tho Surveyor General ot tho Territory, in tho law creating that office; whorein it is mado tho duty of that officer, to ascertain tho origin, nature, character nnd cxtont of all claims to lands, under tho laws, usages nnd customs of Spain nnd Mexioo, and to mnko a full report, on all such claims ns originated before the ces sion of tho Territory to tho United States by the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, of eighteen hundred and forty eight, denoting tho various grades ot titlo, with his decision ns to the va lidity or invalidity of each of tho ninc, under the laws, usages nnd customs of tho country before its cossion to the United Statos; Statutes at I.nrgo 1S.53 1854, sheet acts, pago 309. It thus evidently appears, by the treaty sti pulations between tho United States and tho liepublic of Mexico, nnd by the subsequent le gislation of Congress, that all rights of proper ty, of every description, appertaining to the citizens or inhabitants of tho Territory, previ ous to its cession to the United Stntes, wero to bo sacredly respected and inviolably maintai ned. Thus do whatever rights wero acquired by tho plaintiffs in this suit, by virtue of tho grant of the Political Chief of this province, stand securely panoplied against all invasion; nnd, although Congress hns thought proper to mako itsolf thejudgo of the validity of such grants, it is the duty of the courts of tho Ter ritory to give, to the parties claiming under tbciii, such protection ns the law and canity nf their respective claims demand, until their rights shall have been finally de leriiiiuod by the government of the U. S. Without deciding whether the grant in ques tion, in this case, gave to the grantee a tillo in full property to tlio tract of land therein described, I is unquestionable thai ii inv.-sti it hi in wiih a right of possession to the wholo tract, which eouid not be 'lefeated by imv but the lawful authority, in the annulment or disa vowal .if tho grant. In tlie iih-enco of ,-uiy evi dence of tho annulment, r- iocation or disavow al ot th" act, by the Supreme National govern ment of M-xico, it mu-t stand as eviileneo of the right of pu-sosnou of those claiming und er, or bv virtue of the grant. The action of ejectment is iircly a possesso ry remedy:- its whole ol.jcct is. to put the party claiming possession, into the enjoyment thereof. A judgment in ejectment is a recovery, of lho poo-sion, without Yirejudicoto ihe right, howe ver it may afterward! appear, even between the parties, flam" on cjeeinieni, 32; city of Cin cinnati vs. The Lessen of White, G Peters Re ports, 431. Such was the character of the action in tho emit below. The plaintiffs sought to recover possession, and offered this jtiant as evnleneu of their right of recovery. The grant, distinctly il, lines, by prominent mi l enduring natural ob jects, the metes and bounds uf the tract of land which it purports to convey. Thoso obii'els still exist; and are as distinctly marked now, us they were ut the timo at which they wero men tioned in the deed ot concession: so that thero can bo no doubt ns to the precise boundaries within which the grant lies. It was proved on the trial, ns nppears from the evidence on re cord, that the ranch occupied by the defendant, Alexander Hatch, was within those metes and bounds. If tho grant is worth any thing moro than a blank sheet of paper, as an instrument tmwlimr ti I'liOtm tlift ttliiinrirTj ivhIi u r,,,...,.. even in conquest, private nnd individual rights sory right, if it is sufficient to give them a of property nro not disturbed in the patango of r'itiit of possession to nno foot of tho land, it the conquered country from the old to the new sovereign. "The conqnoror seizes on tho pos session of tho Stato, the public property, while privato individuals aro permitted to retain theirs. Thoy suffer but indirectly by the war; nnd the conquest only subjects them to n new master." Vnttol'n Law of Nations, B 3, chap. 13, Sect. 200. Tho Supreme court ol the U nited Stntes, in tho cao of United States vs: Porcheman, 7 Peters Rep., 80, say, "It may not "bo unworthy of remark, that it is very unusu- "ul oven in cases of conquest, for tho conquer- "or to do more than to displuoo tlio sovereign "and assume dominion over tho country The is ample for tho purpose of giving possession to the whole, and sufficient to maintain the nc tion of ejectment against all othor persons, en tering thereon, who cannot show a better right. The defendant in tho court below, did not prove, or attempt to prove, a better right; and, in the absence of such proof, this grant, (had it been permitted to go to lho jury) aided by tho other testimony adduced on behalf of tho plaintiffs, should havo enabled them to recover. MORTGAGE SALE. By virtue ot a mortgage with power of sale, executed, by Jacob Meyer nnd Jacob Ant. Plif fenor to Caroline Stem, bearing date tho first day of August. A. ). 1854, and recorded in tho rl"'-l-a Allien .(' tlm Pr'h'.tn fViiiO a? ll.n nrt..nl.. "modern usage oi nations, which has becomo 0 stn Fe, in book, P. pages 10, 11 nnd 12, "law, would bo violated, that senso of justice nnd also by virtue of a transfer of said mortga "ami nf rii-ht which is aeknowlodücd und felt go with all its powers, by tlio said Caroline r " V'...: .!. i : i i ...:n .-n -..i.i: oieui to uiu uuuui siucu, l mu ecu Ub liuuno auction in front of the Marshals office in the pu blio plaza of tlio city of Santa fe, on the 14th duv ot Marca, mst. between tne murs ot It) o'. "by the whole civilized world, would bo outra ged if privato property should bo generally "confiscated and privato rights annulled. Tbo "people change their allecinnce; their relation 'to their ancient sovereign is dlssolrcd; but "their relations to each othor, and their rights "of property, romain undisturbod. If this bo "tho modern rulo, evon in cuses of oonquest, "who can doubt its application to tho cuso of 1 i---- .... ,i ii,- ln-a i... ,.r i-:.:: ... .. u. a public proceeding. Tho record thereof " ul 8 mm .win 1 ' . . . . . "ftnrnllnn. rft pons ruflil nnd nctiwl un ... tl,: I " vm nuiim "those States, nnd In thoso where the lnnd en "ded by tho States to the United State lie, nnd "Pennsylvania, whoso land tenures are very ul. "milur in substance, In nil which the origin of clock, A. M. nnd 4 o'clock P. M. of said day the following described real ostato situated in the city of Santa Fe, and described as follows, viz: A certain pioco or parcel of hind with a dwelliuu houso nnd brewery thereon, bounded on the north by the houso and lands of Y:fnU Fernandez, on theonst by the lands of AnjFip .n,lM,l. ..ion of Territory?" l!t. !.. ' '" . .1 ' b ', . . . " ; . . . , ' ' i small sircei separaung sum property irom tno pendent of this genorul principio, it is express-'; house of Miguel Arehulota, and on the west by ly stipulated, hctwoon tho United Statos of A- the main street leading from tho plaza of tho morica and tho Mexican Republic, In tho Troaty ! :",id ci.lv of S,,U fV 10 S"n Hml ,A1b0 tho , ,, ini '. i m n . , fol owing personal proporty; nil tho tools nnule- of Guadalupe Hidalgo, article 10, That, "all ,licm8 j'utensi,. belonging to and in ami a grants of land made by tho Mexican govern- bout said brewery, ono wagon and one horso, ment, or ty the competent authorities, m tor-) also tlio household and kitchen iurmiure, ap. "titles is in general, vnguo inceptive equity; I ritorics previously appertaining to Mexio, and pertiining to said brcwory. win sue, uiu unitcrsui rnie, uiai inc acts of 1 remaining tor mo luturo wiuun me limits ot 'public officers, in disposing of pubiio land, by I the United State, shnll bo rospeoted ns valid "olor or eluiui of puMic authority, nre e7. 1 10 tho t;a: cxtfnt that the eanie grants would Terms of sole cash. ELIAS SPIEGEUJERO. March 1st 1M5.-U -30.