The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1851-02-06

cediog he must sc IN every respect IN conformity with the
pussss made In me eohecuon Of laws iespoe'ins ~
roduc aud settlement, granting them legal utss ior
The owners po,seuoa without sxaens any remunsiaoh
thsIeiof, o. Tor the act OF possession
Under this law, Mr. President, hold that when these
people were pat in possession by the eommandant
their titles legal aud complete Nohlng can ie-
galy be done in The United States 70 nndo ihe'f nlie
nothing can be legally done TO undo u OF make i
less than il was, things may be practically done which
would entirely destroy II Inc section which propose
lage or town the 9TH day OF July, 1916, piima Ias
evidence OF what Oh the presumption OF grant in
favor OF the corporation OF said village or town. not
py,1a es evidence in lavor OF the old settlers according
10 the laws OF Spain. We all know what prim1 faes
is. IL isonly presumption and II II did apply To the
old settlers, Al woald make their titles far below what
they were IN every instance in which these towns
settled forty, hfty sixty seventy eighty years back
But tdoes not even that far does not lar as
10 protect The settlers al all IL Is only pitma fade evi
dence OF general fact alter which and under which are
10 come forward all the questions OF ownership And
the iacl Of the existence OF said city town. or village on
The sand 7h july 1896 shall be priMa tae evidence OF
the grant TO such corporao 10 the Individual under
whom the said lotholders CLAIM That is The question
to which The provision goes II is only presumption
that grant was made 10 the corporaton or pesnup-
ton that II made TO the individual nom whoW Tue
lot-hoders derive their title II did protect the claims
OF the settlers it would be entirely below the legal titles
which they have already under The laws OF Spain These
little lois held by great many peopepoor people
in many instances; and they were poor they ought not
proving title would be more than the lot was worth.
Therefore the law should confirm them Immediately /
ask the yeas and nays the amendment.
The question being taken upon the call for the yeas
Mr. BERRlEN. explained to the Senate. at the time
that this subject first taken up, the grounds upon
which this section Of the bill was founded Il was un-
dersood that grants had been made to the Towns OF four
leagues in extent, with authority TO grant to individuals
town let's, farm lots and pasture lots The object OF this
provision TO relieve the individual stockholders OF
the trouble OF proving their claims and TO enable the cor
poa,lons to lneIpose general claim, which would DC
for the benefit of all There cases in which
cities, towns. and villages were founded upon the grant
originally made TO an individual The act was made TO
apply all cities, towns, &c. which were in existence at
the time the American flag first hoisted there and il
be considered pruna facie evidence OF grant
TO individual or to the corporation from whom the
vision for prima face evidence would be obviously
just TO both Tor if there should be better title, giving TO
Individual an older grant, which should rebuff this
prima acie evidence of the lohoder would have
10 give way This the extent TO which this provision
goes
With respect TO the law referred to by the senator from
Missouri, The law existing the country under which
these towns and villages, and cities have been founded
parties will be entitled to the facilities and the
benefit of them, before the tribunal OF the United States
According TO the provisions OF this BILL the laws and Gus
toms OF the country must regulate the decisions
). Mr. GW!N. am in favor OF the unconditional con-
amendment of the senator from Missouri. because il is
clear and explicit than the section he proposes TO
strike out My desire is to have all of these lots con-
if the amendment OF the senator from Missouri be
adopted.
The question being taken by yeas and nays, resulted
YEAS-Messrs Baldwin, Benton, Bradbury, Chase, Da.
Wis OF ssissipp Dickinson Dodge of Wisconsin, Dodge
OF Iowa Douglas wn, Houston, Seward, Shields Soue,
and Whtcomb-E.
Dawson. Dayton Ewing, Foote, Jones' King, Morton. Nor
rs, Phelps smith Spruance, Turney Underwood, Wales,
So the amendment to the amendment was rejected
MI; BENTON. Imove 10 strike out of the tenth sec
lion the words payment oil such reasonable costs
shall be allowed by the court and suck security for
costs thereafter the said court shall pre-
scribe" The substitute bull OF the committee provides
that cost shall be paid before appeal be taken,
and by people who were given these lands without
cost, who directed in the beginning 10 be put in
possession without fees | hold this TO be OF those
clauses which will operate as conhscaon OF the great
know what the will be- The of attending court
in California is Clerks fees and officers fees
are enormous; the payment of witnesses is enormous.
Everything is beyond what have any conception of.
All these to be paid before appeal is 10 be grant
ed And in is the party receive back the costs
which he may have paid. Although he may ultimately
triumph although it may be decided that he has been
harassed by the United States after he has been carried
through so many years OF litigation after be has been
taken through three tribunals after he has been nearly
ruined n costsalthough this shall appear from the na
decision OF the yet the party TO receive
back In such case as that say, this bill is entirely
The yeas and nays ordered.
The question being taken, resulted;
YEAS-MesHs. Baldwin, Benton, Chase, Dodge of Wis.
oonsin, Dodge of Iowa, Norris, Peafce Seward, Shields
Smith, Souls Walker, and Winhrop-i3.
NAYS-Messrs. BerIen Dor aud, Clay, Davis Of Msssa
Douglas, Ewing, Foo,e, Gwin Houston. Jones' King Nor
ton Phelps, Spuance, Turney, Underwood. and Wales
n.
So the amendment to the amendment was rejected
On motion, the Senate adjourned
TUESDAY. FEBRUARY 4. 1851
I'm coNTINuATIoS.l
SENATE.
PRIVATE LAND CLAIMS CALIFORNIA.
The Senate resumed the consideration of the bill pro.
vidng for the settlement of land claims in California
Mr. TURNEY. Mr.. President, | presume the Senate