The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1851-01-31

domain Is claimed by other individuals TO receive and in
veslga,e the titles of individuals upon the land, and L
conhn those es and 10 put out OF the controversy al
4 those titles which appear 10 be good.
Now, then, with respect To this provision which d.
reefs that patent shall not issue until the claim title
is settled between the individuals claiming, we propose
that the individual claiming title to land shall come IL
and present his claim, and upon tbs continuation OF tina
claim he shall have his patent But perhaps the claim
AMI may not be The entitled to The land and then by
giving him the patent you would put weapon in hi:
hands which he ought not to have. Perhaps that paen
might not settle the tte but cucumber H. and create dit
iculles about IT, The bill, proposed to be amended
BY the senator from Georgia provides that the indvidua
holding clam adverse to the man who has presented
claim may come IN before the Judge oil the court ant
present that CLAIM, and obtain Injunction That IN
junction orbids judicial trial between the parties
all, but forbds ministerial officer to act Here is al
ofcer to issue the patents for all claims properly settled
We forbid him. when claim s not properly settled be
tween the conesting claimants to issue the patent Tha
is all.
livery much prefer that pro ,sion Of the bill. pro
posed to be amended. to The bill originally reported
by the senator from Georgia from the committee. pre-
fer because the bill as originally reported presented az
actual legal cont0e between individuals, to be decided 10y
our courts, conneced with the question between us ant
the party whereas the BILL proposed to be amended
presents saca thing but simply leaves open the case
until determine who ought to receive the patent
Now, II we look at the question in ha, light, consider our
selves andhoder, and these individuals claiming
portions of the public domain, and look upon this as
mere proposition 10 create TIL bunal before whom they
may present their claims, and upon whose favorable re-
port they may obtain patent, this relieves y OF the
will still retain all the rights they had could have had il
we had not passed The bill at all. shall vote Tor The
amendaent for the reason have suggested like the
M pAVs Of sa Mr. the
eighth section OF this bill provides fx settling and ad
jus,ing claims which are derived under the Spanish OF
Mexican governments-itis is limited 10 that This com
mission instituted, as understand il, o that purpose
and that purpose alone The senator iron Ohio M
EwlNG] has said. as think peTneny, that II an indi
yidual already holds good title vested in him by law he
/ ma s He ma q
this commission and, refusing 10 do II, although you
should adudse that his tract Of territory should pass to
the public domain it would not divest him Ct his title
He would remain in possession, and the title would
main vested IN him, Notwithstanding this apparent al
tempt 10 divesi him.
i Now sir, have a remark To make upon this subject
] was in hopes that the from Ohio would have
touched upon the point wish 10 make; and If he had
would not have troubled the Senate with H. was about
10 inquire OF the from Georgia, any other
Der Of the committee, why il is that we should issue
patents at all! Suppose that TINS commission takes VI
The inquiry, the great object OF II being 10 separate the
public domain from private property and the question IN
her investigation to The decision, upon evidence
before nat board OF commissioners that the Unite States
is not the OF the tract OF land which is ~ conro
versy: why should they undertake to settle who Is The
owarr, under these crclms,ancs! Ii would appear. by
the statement OF the senator from Oho-and that seem,
to be the view OF the thng-that the rea
owner OF this land may not go betore this commission a.
all, and intermediate claimant may come and may
show probable title. Why, then, under such crcum
stances, should issue the patent OF the United States
man who may have no tile at all And why should no
these questions be lett 10 be carried into the State court Of
California, and be settled there between the parties resi-
dent there Why should not they be lett to that trlbl
nal and why should we no, at once rid ourselves oil al
and OF all possible injustice which wout
grow out Of lssu'ag patents which may issue improperly
That is the point wished 10 make. have no mnt
made up upon this subjects but that is the point to whcf
desire inve the attention OF the honorable senate
from Georgia :,
sacbusetts who has just taken mis- seat Mr. DAVIS ha
il he had waited short Tune he would nave had prop
oson for amendment, which will be offered, either bl
striking out inserting, which would bring up tor de
cision The important point he has mentioned They VIII
all be brought up in due time Every part oil this bh
wall pass before the Senate, and IN presenting part al
De and in voting upon II, we shall ccme to better con
ciusions. But IN speaking TO other parts oi the OH
while we have particular questions depending, we &c
away from the question and decide no'hns but 20 OF
into the field OF general debate
This also applies what said BY the senator ffou
Ohio tMr EwIkG.] He has opened general question
and these general questions are enlIey beside me par
opens a view OF its own, and which shall bring TO IN,
notice OF the Senate proper time BY proposed amend
mens But | will now. as the senator from OHIO has
led me to the necessity OF doing It, read three or lou
lines from the beginning and towards tue end Of The bill
which will entirely extinguish his view OF the case
will do il by the SIMPLE process OF reading out OF the o
Here presented in section thirteen the pout to which
the senator from New Hampshire Mr.. HALEl invited b'
attention OF The Senatehe particular case IN which per
sons shall forfeit their claims, and IN which case mes
United Satesthe IN which this absorption or re
lapse into the public domain is 10 take place II says
i. Every claim which shall be finally decided To be IN
valid by the district supreme court, and all lands th
claims To which shall not have been presented TO th
said within two years after the date OF TIL
act shall be deemed, and he'd and considered as par
of he public domain of the United States"
These are the words. All the lands the claims II
which shall not have been presented TO the said comms
soners within two years alter the date OF tins act shai
be ioheiled-shall become part OF the pubic domain
There is another in which they to be foeite
and relapse the United Sales-every case which de
ciied be invalid finally, either by The district or Su
preme Court OF the United States These are the cases
Now what proportion OF the land claims in the State o
California will these two conditions involve what pro
portion OF theml lew OF them, small part OF them
Will they involve any given class or quality OF them
No, sir Look at the beginning of the Sth section
and you will what is involved. Look sir. al secto
sth and you will there find that saeh and srsry pero'
ciaming lands in California, by rir"e Of any right o.
title derived from The .Merteda or Spsn,h gouenmsnf
shall present the 10 sad eonma snsrs whsn stnt
board" &C. These are the words OF the section Il
which the OF forfeiture aFply and they IN
clude all the claims of everybody Who u leit behind
What man. what woman, what child, what Indian ]
left behind when leach and every person" 10 included
Wha, land is left behind None! No, even pueblo lot
of twenty square, which could not be sold 10
a hen and chickens! Now we see what a person !
liable TO. Every inch OF land that s claimed 10 Cal
iforna by virtue OF grants from the Spanish and Mex
can governments is TO be forfeited and become par
OF the public domain unless il goes safe through TIN
ordeal And what use is IL to talk about treaties IN
case Of this kind when the law has declared the CLAIM
and sent surveyors to survey in Is the treaty any pro
lection under such circumstancesl Every lawyer wal
tell YOU that the treaty the paramount law of the land
and this act deptive man OF his property TIL