Arizona citizen., 1879-10-18
Translated from Fl Fronterlro.l The Twenty League Zone Trouble n So

s the Governor of Sonora, Francisc, l. Scrn issued to the tribunals and othe . authorities of the State, calling |, - their notice the provisions of the law q of February I, 1866, which prohibit - the acquisition of real esta'e by for eigners within zone oftwentv league from the boundary line separatin. - Mexico from other nations, some o
 our American colleagues have passed
 erroneous judgments thereon, on lh, Q suppositiOn that the Governor himsel was tine author of the said law. Thes,
 wrong impressions We hasten to con tradict, and at the same time propoS, - to consider the question in a differen light, namely, as to the construction which the Executive of Sonora In. pnt upon said law.
 ,I On a former occasion, though with { different object, we treated rhe mair
 question. and we have no reas"n now to change the opinion then expressed
 which, We are sorrt to say, does mol
 agree, as far as the mines are con
 cerned. with the following communi cation of the Governor of the State:
 " IL being prohibited by the law oi
 February |, '5G, that foreigners should
 acquire real estate in the frontier States
 and Territories, within a zone of twen Ity leagues from the bOuudar, line, ex
 cept by special permit of the Presi dent or the Republic, 1 hope that the Supreme Tribunal will instruct those
 acting under ifs authority not to saLc. tiOn or allow any contract whereby
 any foreigner may acquire title to real estate, mines included, witi in sixty
 miles from the bOundar, line, except
 Tn case that the necessary permit signed by the President of the Repub.
 lie be preSen ed Liberty in the Con. stitutiOn. Jul. I, 1879. F. Serna." The law of February lSt in the arii
 cle quoted says:
 No foreigner shall acquire, with
 out previously obtaining permit from the Supreme Government, real estate in the frontier States and Territories, except twenty leagues beyond the
 boundary line"
 | IL appears then that the said pruhib itiOn does not ,ncntion in any wise the mines which the Governor of Sonora | includes i'll his communication as being real estate
 To repel such interpretation we will ] not use any arguments or deductions drawn from the laws of Mexico, by which the mines have ever been con sidtred as mere servitude, and we do not do it. as such arguments would be entirely useless, in the face of what the General Government of the Re public has already determined by the following communication
 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE PUBLIC WORKS AND PUBLIC INSTRUCTION. See tiOn of Public Works No. 1. By the official communication of the 18th of October last my attention is called to the following note:
 "CITIZEN MINISTER: D. Jose A. Ji- mencS has directed tO the Governor of Sonora a note on behalf of mining company O. California, United States in which it iS asked if the prohibition against foreigners to acquire lands ad- iaCent 10 the boundary lines, can be understood to apply 10 inc land neceS- sar tO secure water and pl>turage for their animals, especially where there are no commons and where there i, a lack of those other advantages men toned in Article 3, Title l3, of the Mining Laws.
 In order to pass upon the question, this department has examined the law .of July 22 ultimO, and finds that by Article ? foreigners belonging to neighbOrinG nations are precluded from acquiring public lands near the boundaries of thcIr own country, but this does not prohibit the mining com pany in question from enjoying the ad- vantageS conceded by the mining laws under their circumstances in the above cited article.
 This article does not say that the springs and commons existing in min ing districts for the accommodation of the animals working the machine. should be the proper Y ot the individ- ualS or companies who have discovered the mines, but only that there should be sufficient land set apart for the con venience and development of the en- terp.i>e and use of the miners, said lands and springs being held in com mon, not 10 he sold to any individual, church or religious society, such pro visions preclude the right of prOper'y, and plainly show that though ihe law maker intended 10 favor fhe mining interest. he never proposed to give to the miners the lands, but only to grant them the use of them.
 Consequently, if it is true that by the law above quoted, foreigners, na- tives of nri"hhoring nations, cannot acquire title to public lands, that dOe> not hinder them when they have dis covered one or more mines from using ihr public lands in the vicinity, having first obtained permission from the Su- preme Government. which will be granted to such an extent as nay be necessary for the purpose of the enter prise, either hy paying a rent chal ge or gratulluodSlN 'ul hvNVl El"iit lllS f,e simple as the lands and springs should be reserved for the common Il C of the miners.
 This department does not know the motives which induced the General Government to prohibit the acqui>i- lion of public lands ny the natives of neiuhhorins nations, but since it was so disposed, there must have been pow erful reasons for it which must be kept in mind in deciding the present ques- ton, for il is true that foreigners can not be owners in fee simple of the. necessary lands for the developments. of the mines. the law does does moi. prohibit that they should have such interest in them a> k provided by Art. sd of title l3 of the mining law>.