Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1870-12-22

pute, containing many leagues ana a.
legged to be worth many millions. The
proper and documentary evidence, how.
ever, of title was not found in the Mex
lean archives. The claim was brought
before the Land Commission established
by Congress to adjust such titles, and
was by them rejected. Upon appeal to
the District Court, however, after the
decision of the Fremont case, the claim
was adjudicated by that court in favor
of Gomez, the clerk in the Commissary
Department, unIer whom McGarrahan
claims. But the unfortunate fact was
that one Pacifcus Ord, the United
States District Attorney, who ought to
have protected the rights of the United
States, was at the same moment joint
owner in the claim, having purchased
half of it of Gomez-a fact which, in my
judgment, taints the whole proceeding,
and this taint is not in any way lessen
ed because in other Mexican grants
Gomez admits that he was accustomed
to forge the title grants in such claims,
showing his capabil.ty in that line by
doing it in open court in presence of the
Judge. After adjudication of the DIS
trict Court, and before any appeal was
taken, McGarrahan, without any notice
of the fraud of Gomez, for aught that
appears. except that the papers show
that Ord, the District Attorney, was
owner of an interest in the claim, bought
the claim for valuable consi ieration.
But the United States, represented by
the late Edwin NJ. Stanton, afterwards
appealed the case to the Supreme Court,
and after proceedings there of great
length and cost-some of which could
well have been different, and which it
is unnecessary to go into-the claim was
adjudicatsd as wholly void and set
aside.
In the meantime, some four persons
had entered upon the land under the
mining laws of California, and under the
name of the New Idria Mining Compa-
ny had developed the quicksilver mine
in the land in dispute, worth, as is alleg
ed, some FIVE million of dollars. This
company has always appeared in the
courts and before Congress in various
forms as the opponents of McGarrahan,
claiming title to. the land, and the quss-
ton has always been dealt with as if it
were one interesting only to those two
claimants. ....
a;;MeGarrahan sought an. act of Con-
gress comforting the title of the land to
himself upon the ground that he bought
without knowledge of any defect in the
Gomez title, if any exists, after the
judgment of a United States Court had
been given, confirming that title. The
majority of the committee were not con-
vincsd of the validity of the claim or of
his equitable rights, because, first, Gomez
did not appear to have had any title,
and secondly, that the vsrySingenious
and able attempt to import the princi-
pies of law securing the rights of pur-
chasers, without notice, of commercial
paper before it is due, into the law con-
corning real property, could scarcely
succeed. Upon that point the COM
mittes were inclined to hold that
a purchaser of land bought no
greater title than the seller had to sell,
however much title the seller might
have appeared to have; and, for thai, ,and
because the matter had been fully adju-
dicated in the courts, reported against
the pretensions of Mr.. McGarrahan.
Before going on with the hearing,
however, the committee directed its
chairman to request the Secretary of the
Interior not to issue a patent by any
body to the land until the Committee
had finished the investigation in the
premises This request of the Commit
tee the Secretary at first promised to
comply with, but afterwards was very
unwilling to adhere to his promise,
being quite desirous. apparently to
give patent to til , New Idria Com
pany, and asked the opinion of the At
torney General whether he was bound
to withhold the patent,at the request of
the Committee. Of course the Attorney
General replied that he was not so bound
by law; but the Committee came to the
conclusion that they would make it very
inconvenient for Mr.. Cox if he would
not listen to their suggestion and keep
his promise to them. The Secretary,
however, upon consideration, thought it
best not to issue the patent till the Com
mittee had finished their labots.
When the Committee had agreed upon
report as to the rights of McGarrahan,
not with unanimity, however, one of
their number suggested another consid
Grafton as seeming to him worthy of in
vestigation, which was. that while the
United States had spent some quarter
of million of dollars, more or less, in
defending this land from McGarrahan 8
claim, all that money seemed to have
been spent in the interest of the New
Idria Mining Company, and that
member of the committee desired to in
quire by what title the New Idria
Mining Company claimed to hold the
land, and was informed that it was only
under the mining laws of California
He then raised the question in the COM
mittee how it was that four persons,
who could only bold, under the mining
laws Of California, as it was understood,
one thousand feet each of mining lands
could claim many leagues OF land
.r.inst the TTnited States -E
In the waning hours of the session,
just then closing, there was no time to
summon the New Idria mining Compa-