Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1886-06-16
wac sacrnmento snuatter Rlot

q correspondent of San Francisco pa
per recently took issue with Professor Jo-
siah Royce, of Cambridge, Mass relative
to the account he gives in his book on Cali
fornia concerning the squatter controversy
in this city in 1850. To this Professor
Royce replies: The case is briefly this
Sutter had plain and satisfactory title to
eleven leagues, title given in 1871 by Al
varado. The technical objections to this
grant were frivolous on their face, and were
later oyerruled by our Courts. Moreover,
| this grant was VIGOROUSLY intended to in
clude Suffers establishment at New Hell
! vetia, and hence the land on which the
! new town of Sacramento afterWard grew
| up. Al this equitable and legal right of
Suffer to the land that he had reclaimed
from the wilderness. and that the Govern
ment of the Department of California had
given him, were familiar to the new
corners of 1919 and 1850, because Fremont's
Report' was then well-known and gen
orally read book, and because Fremont had
stated the facts as they had appeared to dis
interested observers long before the gold
excitement was thought of Hence, as |
say, the rights of Suffer must be especially
obvious to all new corners, in so far as re-
lated to the town of Sacramento, and
place was especially dangerous, predatory
and groundless. The serious evils of such
movements, viewed in their relation to the
history of our State, nobody can doubt who
has studied the matter. And for all these
reasons | have thought it proper to dwell
in MY book, with no little severity, upon
the squatter movement of 1850 as a typical
case of misunderstanding.
Now, however, as it happens, Suffer
flor whom, by the way, ! have no sort of
partisan fondness) was not content with
his valid Alvarado claim. He set up his
wholly invalid Micheltorena claim to an
additional twenty-five leagues-a worthless
claim in every legal respect. | make no
defense of that claim. Everybody knows
its history, and ]. w need not have
taken the pains to write out once more the
familiar facts But unfortunately the
struggle Of 1850 in Sacramento had no re-
lation to the Sobrante claim but had rela-
ton only to the Alvarado claim, whose
validity ! repeat, should have been OBJ
vious to every honest mind. 1t is useless
to give the failure of the Micheltorena
claim as a justification for the predatory as
saults on the Alvarado claim. The two
were entirely diverse claims, and that J.
w must know. He must know, more
over that Sacramento was claimed by the
Suffer party in 1850 only under the Alva-
RADIO claim, the claim of the grant from
Mieholtorena having no bearing on the
Sacramento controversy, but concerning
land that lay elsewhere.
"The matter, then, reduces itself simply
to this: Has one a right to take what I'M
doubleday belongs to man merely be-
cause that man is himself oyer-acquisitive
or is disposed on his part to try to get more
than his due. j. w in effect lustifies
the Sacramento squatters on the ground
that although Suffer did own the land
which they tried to get. he still did not
own certain other lands which lay else
where. re9ret deeply that this dismal
superstition which defends open injustice
on the ground that the victim is himself,
on other occasions or in other places,
guilty of making mistaken claims for him
| self, should be in this age maintained by
| your correspondent, j. w If Suffer was
| elsewhere at fault. so be it. In fact he was
| elsewhere at fault, and know it. l think
| him no saint, and have said so plainly in
my book But my argument is not that
Suffer was saint, but that he owned land
! in Sacramento, of which lawless souatters
| tried violently to despoil both him and his
! legal successors during the agitation OF
| 1880, these squatters well knowing the
grounds on which his claims were based.
! The communication of j. W. as an
anonymous and therefore irresponsible let
! ter would not need an answer were this
not an important question, both OF history
and of morals. 1t is on account of this inn
portance of the topic that venture thus to
| trouble YOUR kindness with the present
iatfnr ~