Weekly Arizona citizen., 1880-08-21

upon, he would have signed his name accurately and in his accustomed manner; and if not imposed upon, the strong presumption is that he would not have performed his part in such careless, awkward and incorrect way as appears in the original proceedings now ln the Sonora archives, and per iectly illustrated iE the photographic eXhihits. It is as extremely improbable that Jose JuSto Miila ,igned bis name under any circumstances "Josc Jose Milla as that Joseph John Bro"n would sign his Joseph Joseph Brown Co document conveying large interests, and the doing of which would involve great responsibility.
 D. That comparison of the sig natures of Jesus TraSquillo as found in the title papers of the two grants referred to, with those on Nos. IS lg and 20 of photographic exhibits. shows beyond doubt that they were not made by the same hand; and like comparison shows that the sigma ture of Santos Vigarria, as found in the said grants, is unlike the signature ol santos Nigarria as shown by No. 2l ot photographic exhibits
 6. That No. 22 of photographic ex- hibits shows the page of the book of I"ma de RaZun in which the grants cf Fl Paso de los Algodones and La Punto del Sargento should have been registered if made on April F, 1888. as set forth in the title papers; and since twenty-one (2D other grants made Tn 1S3S, are found registered in said book, it is a very suspicious cir cumstance that neither of these grants are therein registered, nor ar; they in any other book of record.
 IL will be observed that the note of registry as found on the eSpediente of the gran of Fl Paso de Jos AlgodoneS, merely states that inc grant is regIs- tered in the corresponding book, '" without referring Co the page.
 In notes of registry on expedientes it was customary 10 refer to the page of the book on which the registry was made. The omission to register these two grants in the corresponding book was one of necessity, because it was impossible to make entry of them ID said book at the proper place and of the date, April l2, lS3S, as shown hy pho;Ogra exhibit 9.
 The inquiry naturally arises as to the m0tirs for manufacturing grant for the desert and afid tract of La Punta del Snrgentc? The answer to this seems 10 be. The Rancho of " Fl P3So dc los Algod0neS was the 0Jjoctics tract in the proceedings, and that of the Pun,a del SsrgeRtO was 8 fabrication 70 sustain the AlgOdunes. On the hypothesis that the AlgOdUne, was ante dated as well as forged, the parties engaged therein would very naturally suppose that the bond .fi6S thereof might At some time be lnqHiTrd into, and if ihe records in tue archives of Sonora would show & grant executed simultaneously with if, the fact would strongly tend 10 prove that i' i;he AlE0doneS) was made in good faith and q, the time of its date.
 T. is true that careful inspection of the record of the grant "f Ia Puu'a del SaTgcnt0 would reveal Ii> spurious character, but such an inspection would be highly improbable in connection with an examination of auOthe~ claim before the tribunals of d foreign coun- try
 The title papers in this case arc ccrti fled hv Jose Ma. Mendoza to be genuine who for many years was Treasurer General of the Siare Of Sonora, and also by Jose de Aguilar, Ex-Governor of the State, and st present the lead ing lawyer of Sonora. Such rertih. catcs as these are unusual tO grants o' undauhjed grnuincncSs and excite suspicion among men well informed in the premises. The inquiry naturally ariSeS-Whv should the AlgOdoues craDt be supported hv this class oi testimony any more than other grants made by the Mexican Gu'horitieS oi Sonora? No genuine Mexican grant papers filed in this office, have sup porting certificates.
 Ii will be observed that Jose Agui. lar. In his certificate, styles h1mSeii Governor of the State Of Sonora whereas the history Of the times shows that at the date of his cerclicaie, June S 1857. Ignacio Pesquiera was Gov ernor of said State. This indicates thai the certificate was given without much care. Notwithstanding rhc cer tificares of Mendoza anI Aguilar are genuine and may have been executed in good faith, they do not give any value 10 a fraudulent title paper The records of ihe United States District Court for California and also those of the United States Supreme Court, re lafing to title 10 grants of land by ;he Mexican authorities. repeatedly show that the testimony of Mexican officials was not and could not be accepted as conclusive. The eases in point are so numerous as 10 render citations super fiuous.