OCR Interpretation

Santa Fe weekly gazette. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 185?-1859, March 03, 1855, Image 2

Image and text provided by University of New Mexico

Persistent link: https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn88071075/1855-03-03/ed-1/seq-2/

What is OCR?

Thumbnail for

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
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
-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
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
. .. 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
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
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.
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.
March 1st 1M5.-U -30.

xml | txt