New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1855-04-05
IMPORTANT LAND CLAIMS pncrDyn

tnSHissros "Wednesday, Apnl 4. 1865
IN ins Ss,e oi me United States. appellants, v,
Archibald a. Richie. An appeal from &c.. !, y.
District COur, Tor the Northern ID IT,, ~ es
nis. Judge Nelson recently delivered the op,nis, :,
the United S's,es supreme Cour.. Il Which tho g.
lowing Is a condensed summary:
The Board of CON a. settle priv.,at.,
CLAIMS in Csf0rnis, or,isres thsi Ri,chie cl,, =,
uaet OF laad known Oy the nsma of sli,ia oa.
prsing about Il, 0O0 res, Ia the Cjlafy Of sI.,
should be confrme1 this decision ~ss apo "A f,.
IN the above Distiice Court, bu; it vas dscidsI a.
the sth OF November, ISIS 20 cOndrm the daci.;a.
OF The Board OF Comm ssiOners-hence the apo.,I :.
the United States Supreme Court
Judge Nelson inst Is i0rth ia. N thu
act Of Copense OF March 3, 1851. upon the saoisc,
under which the appellee claimed that the ren,.yJ
Of The proceedings from the Bo,rd e Commissioners.
10 the District Court was detective, ba the jail,
considers that certain ons OF the act Of 1881 10
repealed by the act of Bis, August l-J2 thereby ~.
moving the alleged defect After Gs,osing Of :, ma
other objections regard 70 certaia iaof n,as, in
the transfer OF the case from ths B)s-r OF ,pns.
soners 70 the District Court Judge Nelson eJms "a
The merits OF TIE case and sptalacs az en 9Th tia
title 10 the lands in quesoa tracing them fr,m TIA
possession Of Fraacsco Solino al Indian who h.
them under cultivation esfly A. 1852 or sjl and
Hho'e tien' 20 them was couhrnei by the c,n1titl-
tionsl Governor of the Department OF iha
BY the official decree IN lsi2 through the bznos ~
Msrauo Guadalupe Vallejo, who held thetl tom 1912
20 1850, 10 the poSsession A R.tenis the a,oelee
who pur,hastd them on the 29ta Of Nay, $50 FOR tho
sum $780, coo. The objections taken TIE validity
OF the title are, that SOlanO. being al Indian
not competent, according 70 the avs vi Mexico,
take and mold real property. ana leace the grant
wss VOID. Secondly: That II Solsno com oetent
TO hold real estate still the grant is void, the
ground that the tract know IS S0asa belonged 90
the mission lands 10 California, winch the public su-
thorities Of that Department had no poFer 20 grant,
Reference as then mace 10 tic pisn CT ignls aad
decree of the first Congress of Mexico, nsciauux tas
ousiity OF cvl rights, Whatever may be tleT
country under which the Court dscices tbs, solano
was one OF the citizens oi the Mexican Go, eminent 81
the time of the graz 10 HIM, ana tGat IS sIca. no
was competent to take, holi, ami convey rs, prop
erty, the came any other citizen OF the Republic.
In regard to the second obecuon-thst the tract IN
question belonged 10 the vi sOn lsncs-the conclu-
scn j., that there appears 70 be lOundson for il
ard that, under certain laws OF Mexico the Ruthor-
Ties empowered TO desi with those Missions
the "a with any other portions OF the spublic
domain. The Court, therefore, affirmed the decrssd
the District Court.
In the Gaze of John Charles Fremont app sllant ".
The United States-an appeal rou n 3 District Court
of the United States ior the NOrllsrl Distriot Of
California Chief Justice fancy del ge.ei the opia.
ion OF tho United S.etes supreme Court "a sdb-
stance as follows:
The Court bestowed much stteston upon this cass.
many claims to lanes iu Csiifornis depend upon
the same principles and will in effect be decided by
the Judgment of the Court 10 tals case. prsiu-
mary question to the jurisdiction OF the District
Court aving been decided IN he foregoing case the
Court proceeded TO examine the validity Of tho olsn
upon this appeal.
After lengthy disquisition upon the practice In re-
gard grants OF lend 10 Louisiana and Florida when
those Territories first coded 10 the United Sta.s
ana how far the proceeding in those SECS would apply
to such az that row under consideration, the Judge
comes TO the question of the validity Of the grant
Avarado of the trsct Of land known by the name Of
Msriposas which was the point in controversy, snd
arrives al the conclusion that the grant to ysrs2e
gave him vested ipter,st in the quantity Of land
therein spec ied ara that said interest not for
feited by failure TO comply with certain conditions
10 the survey suo et ment attached to the grant,
the siaie of the coJltry tom Wild Indians rendering
CON piiarce with thu nJlliens quite imprseicsble;
thar Col Fremonts purchase of the lsnds 10 l5E
perfectly consistent hls rights ana duties
American ot.cer huc citizen, the country in which AZ
made iho pUrthase being at the time subject to
the authority ana dominion OF the United States,
and tr the fact that not citizen OF Msx,o
could in no way impair the validity of the conveyancs
to him. That the subsequent discovery Of gold mines
on the lano bac nothing to do with the tide and that
the survey must now be- made under the authority Of
the United States IN the form and divisions pres rbed
by law for surveys in California, embracing the CO.
tire grant in ole tact. Upon the whole, 1t % the
opinion OF tie Court that the claim Of the petitioner
is valid and ought 10 be confirmed. the dscros Of
the District Count must therefore bs reversed, aud
the case remanded with directors 70 the Distress
Court 10 enter decree con'ormsbly ~ this opinion
Col Fremonts claim Is thus recognized by the 81
preme Court