New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1886-04-18
TIVE MAXWELL LAND GRANT
SOME INTERESTING FACTS RKcALLKD BY JUDGE
pRgRERs RECENT DECISION.

SOME INTERESTING FACTS RKCALLkD bi 'oD""
BREWERS RECENT DECISION.
,1WAsHINGroN, April 17.-The full text or tho
decision of United States Circuit Judge bie"c'. on
ered at Denver not long since IN the famous ease Vi '
Ipitcd states ACT. the Maxwell Land Grant Company,
10 set arde the patent has reached washington
INA remembered that Land Commissioner Sparks some
time In June last elaborate report to Secretary
Lamar on the Maxwell Grant in New MEXICO c'an"s
that II was great fraud. and that by the H"uuu "
action OF the Deputy United States Surveyors vie
aries had been enlarged as to add to the gran. "'
l6OOO 900 acres Of the public domain The report
stated that he Hon. S. b. Elkns the alleged owner
Of this vast empire acquired by fraud ana 'i"' us
brother John T. Elkns State Senator Ill 0oorauo
with Mr. Morrison had made the fraudulent survey III
the interest OF the This report roa'hu '"o
country through the Associated fress M" ' - '
comment Mr.. Elkins at once prompt! "ro'o 'p No
denvnr that he was then or ever hau rec" '-ioo'" "
indirectly an owner or part owner in Tue ""A"o 'i"
,h, be WINS in college when IT was confirmed ana never
, a,vtbtrp about its sale, stating that about hit en-
vars s he acted for two years the local attorney
for the unfortunate company that bought It, ana Gaining
on Sparks for any information In his possession thal leu
him to Mr. Elkns was the owner TO TINS sparks
MAIDS no reply. Elkns knowing sparks-having served
with him In Congress-called him and demanded to
know why he had IN official paper after charging
that the Maxwell Grant was fraudulent declared Mr.
Eklns TO be the owner. person who was present at
the says that Sparks replied: why supposed
you were the owDer-it is generally believed-rumor
saws YOU are" Elkns remarked that twas hardly iar
or last for high officer OF the Government in an oclal
document to connect upon mere ruInor private ct-
with what that official declared to be great
fraud Yet this is Just what Sparks had done.
The discussion that followed the publication OF
Sparkss report brought out singular facts am ng
them that the Maxwell Grant was confirmed In 1850.
Judah Benjamin being the author pf the CONTINUATION
act ana that Secretary OF State Bsyard while Senator
and a member of the Private Land Claims Committee
OF the Senate, gave written opinion OH the Maxwell
Grant declaring it was valid. and the title perfect
to all the land included within lis boundaries Tor
which he was pad $4,000 1t also turned ont that Carl
Sthurz while Secretary OF the Interior authorized the
granting of the patent all the lands included within
what sparks declared to be the fraudulent boundaries
Bayard's opiniOl ana SchuIZ's order were known 10
Sparks made his report. As TO Mr.. Ekins being
the OF the grant, that charge was slmp Official
As to survey being fraudulent. Sparks also know
when he wrote his report that the surrey was a sae
September. 1877, defining clearly and explicitly just
the deputy surveyors These INSTITUTIONS followed
to the letter IN making lie survey But the following
extracts from Judge Brewers decision rendered AFTER an
exhaustive rial OF the furnishes the fullest answer
Sparkss charges. Speaking OF tine allegations OF
fraud in the survey Judge Brewer says:
The Part Of the surveyors o. The claimants there IS not
s be S %d the matter
the of department they acted on the
presented to them within their knowledge
with parties interested grant
save as protested their action in excluding
the Una tract from the IL ever there was an
official improper conduct shown on the
part officials IL thu The same may be said
OF the conduct Of the clamants.
In concluding his opinion judge Brewer further says
the sts upon which fraud and imposition
predcaed IS II not just 10 that the Government has
wholly failed TO prove its allegations More need not ne
added the with the final observation that after
the fullest inquiry and observation by the government WIN
and facilities at its command the oihccTs OF the
Government the claimants of the grant stand without
stain upon If their conduct and The boundaries
finally surveyed and patented not proved
and correct at least SHOWN TO
be as nearly any known testimony can determine.
The bill will be dismissed.
The decided against the Cove nment and the
title to all the land included within the boundaries and
the charged by Sparks to be fraudulent was hed
20 be good and valid.
leading Republican Senator remarked. after reading
Spaks's report, Bayards opinion, and Schurzs order
the patent all of which have been published in
TIE TRIBUNE, there should he an investigation by
the senate. tain all the facts touching Bayards
and schurzs conduct and II there any truth what
ever in Sparkss report II is felt by Republicans that
withdrawing Judge Brewers decision the action OF
Bsysr schurz should be better understood by the
country.