Amador weekly ledger., 1858-03-06
WEEKLY LEDGER.
The Pico Claim.
JACKSON, Feb. 23d, IS5s

dreaS IlcO, which mas Sucn unusually pilan
lines that with exceeding case they are made
to include within their limits many Of the
most fertile valleys, valuable property, and
fourishing villages in this region of country,
has been confirmed by the District Court OF
the United States, and that the appeal to
the Supreme Court, which is usually taken,
has been dismissed. Whether this be true
or not. have no means of knowing But
granting that is so, then in what condition is
it? Let us inquire. There is concutenation
of steps which must be taken to complete the
inchoate titles of Mexican grantees. The
claim in question has passed onward to that
point where it is ascertaned that Pico has a
right to eleven leagues of land as against the
Government. This is as far as it has pro-
gressed He has not obtained his patent
therefore his title is not complete. 1t is pos
sible that he may never get it, either, though
it is certain that he will unless something be
done to prevent him. ] suggest the policy
of instituting proceedings to thwarth him. 1t
can be done; at least think SO; the effort
is worth trying. Congress, in their tender
regard for the poor, honest, and toiling agri-
culturalist, who lives by the sweat of his
brow, have provided that though these claims
be confirmed and though the surveys be made
according to law, yet, if the title to the land
be controverted, that the parties contesting
shall have the right to file their petition in
the District court of the United States
praying an Injunction to restrain the claimant
from sueing out his patent; and that on thirty
days notice to the claimant, the Dist Court
shall proceed to hear hnd determine the same;
and that, if it be found to be proper case
for equitable interference, the Court shall
grant an injunction restraining the party at
whose instance the claim had been confirmed
from sueing out his patent, until the title can
be finally decided, or sufficient time for OBJ
tanning such decision shall have elapsed
From this you may readily observe the posi-
tion of this claim. 1t must appear to all at
first view that Pico's claim is not beyond in
vestigaton Now, undoubtedly, the survey
which Pico has made is not in conformity
with his original grant; if it be not, then the
settlers have right to contest it. This is
not merely my dictum, but a decision of the
United States Supreme Court. Again (;
Those who are within the proper limits of the
grant, and who located prior to the lst of
March, 1851, may contest his claim by virtue
of rights acquired under the pre-emption
laws. This attempted to demonstrate in
my last letter. Prior location is a point
which Pco will find very difficult to get over.
If his grant were a fixed one, it would not be
quite so troublesome Now, / would urge
the necessity of commencing the contest with
this land-shark Immediately, the sooner the
better; but if he should get his patent be-
fore proceedings could be instituted, yet there
would be no cause for despair. Your homes
could still be defended in the State Courts.
There is very erroneous opinion concerning
the effect of those patents which are issued
to claimants, now prevalent in the commun-
ty. 1t is supposed that they are conclusive
upon the whole matter. This is not so. In
the first place Congress have not attempted
to make them so, and in the second place
they could not if they would. Legislation by
the United States for the purpose would be
unconstitutional and void No such power
ever was granted to Congress The Govern
ment Of the United States is sovereign with
in its delegated powers and proper sphere;
but beyond this it is as feeble and impotent
as an old man in his second childhood The
United States can no more prescribe rules for
the determination of titles to the real proper
ty than Tom, Dick, or Harry, who may be
large landowners in the State, and reside in
some foreign country. They could say how
they would sell their lands, and on what con-
ditions you can become a purchaser, and SO
can the United States and that is all. There
is no difference. The right to prescribe rules
for ascertaining title to lands is the peculiar
province of the respective States
Mere anon. CADMUs
A wag passing through Main Street, Wor-
eester, saw on a sign the following:--
Turning of every description done here"
- = r Al