Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1889-02-24

-
Hon. E. Washington, House of Represents
tiVes.
SIR have the honor to acknowledge the re-
ceipt of your communication of the I'D instant,
transmitting house joint resolution No. 2lS, Tor
examination and report in full from this depart
ment. In reply thereto, l have the honor to
sioner of the general land Office upon the facts
called for by said resolution. The copy OF the
land office therein referred to- Is not transmitted,
II being accessible to your committee. Very re-
spectlully, WILLIAM F. Villas, Secretary.
lCoPY.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, }
GENERAL LAND OFFICE, ;
WASHINGTON, D. c., Sept. ., 1888.
Hon. VIM. F. Villas, Secretary of the Interior:
SIR-I have the honor to acknowledge the re-
ceipt, by departmental reference, of letter of
Hon. j Z. Washington, house Of representa-
tives, of the 22d inst. enclosing COPY of t'H''
Res. 2ls, upon which an early report is re-
In reply, have to state. that the records Of
this office show that on December 81, 1862 the
Hon. j. d. Cox, then secretary Of the interior,
rendered decision limiting the grant to twenty
two square leagues; or eleven square leagues to
each claimant, there being two OF them
An al plication filed by the claimants for 8
review or this decision, which was refused by
Secretary Delano, Mr.. Cox s successor, July 81
1871, upon the ground that he had authority
to reverse his predecessor s decision in the case
The parties, however, refused to accept q sur
vey under the restrictions of the decision Of
December 81, 1859, and consequently, on the 2Sth
directed to treat the lands claimed as public
lands, and to extend the public surveys over the
same.
The public surveys were extended accordingly:
the township plats filed in local land offices, and
entries were thereupon allowed under the public
AT the October term Of the supreme court, 1876.
in the case of John G.. Tameling VS.. U. 8. +. s.
z. Co. I93 .. s., 644l, it was held that the con-
hrmatiOu by congress IN that case was effeCtual
and operative for the entire tract, as ''recom-
mended for confirmation by the surveyor gen.
eral. -
The above named decision was in case which
was considered by my predecessor, Mr.. William
son, in all essential particulars parallel to
the Maxwell grant case, and the 10th of
March, 1877, upon his own motion and at his
own instance, far the records Show-he
addressed q letter to Mr.. Schurz. then secretary
OF the interior, calling attention to the fact that
the deci ion of the supreme court in the Tame
ing case, and the decision of Secretary Cox in
the Maxwell case, were Numerically opposite;
and requested instructions as to how he should
proceed in the adjudication of like cases in the
future.
On the 18th of March, 1877, after stating the
facts n the case, Mr.. Schurz Instructed this Of
fee as follows:
'sThe decision of the supreme court must be
taken as the true construction of the law, by
which the rights OF the parties are to be deter
mined
''You Will, hereafter, be governed by the rule
laid down by the court in Id case, mall similar
cases, and patents will issue for the tract recon-
mended by the surveyor-general, and confirmed
by an act OF congress, notwithstanding it may
exceed in amount eleven square leagues of
land"
In pursuance of these instructions, the sur
yevor- general on the 18th of June, 1877, was di-
rected to survey the grant lin strict accordance
with the description of the boundaries as given
IN the judicial possession The survey was
made accordingly, and was a proved by the
surveyor general December 20, 1878.
This survey was forwarded here, with objec-
lions by the grant claimants, who claimed that it
did not contain the quantity of land they were
entitled to; but the survey was accepted by this
office as correct and patent issued May le, 1879,
rsroW rfrrrI =
A srit was brought in the Eighth judicial cir
cult to set aside this patent and it carried to
the United States supreme court where it was
decided adversely to the government. United
States Reports, Vol. l21, p BIS.
The United States petitioned for a rehearing of
the case and thereupon the court rendered adj
verse decision which may be found in United
states Reports, Vol. I22 p. 36j.
This report covers, briefly, the important facts
in the history OF the case having relation 10 the
purport of the resolution, and I send herewith
copy OF general land Office report for 1885 in
which will be found q detailed history of the
grant, commencing at page 125,
The tenor and object of the resolution, to the
extent of indemnifying adverse claimants, who,
in good faith, and in view of the conflicting rul-
ings of the department, have been induced to
make settlement and expenditures within the
patented limits Of the Maxwell grant, meet with
The policy of suspending all writs of eject
ment during the tendency of the examination
and report provided for in the resolution is a
matter which more properly belongs to the law
department of the government, and upon which
it is presumed, am not called upon for the ex-
preston of an opinion.
This office is not in possession of data showing
the number of persons, or the character and ex-
tent of their improvement and expenditures
which are adverely affected by the grant patents
but il is safe to say that there are several hun
dred such persons with diversified improvements
involving expenditures equally diversified.
would, therefore, suggest that an examina-
ton and report to congress OF the extent of
each adverse holding, the value of the land en-
bracsd within such holding, and also the value
improvements holding ctr
etc, as required by the resolution, would in
volve m re labor, time and expense by the land
de- artment of the government than could rea-
sonably be furnished under its present organiza-
ton.
Congress should, therefore, make provision
for carrying out the object Of the resolution
Very respectfully, your obedient servant.
TT ANDERSON
Acting Commissioner,
The report of the commissioner of the |
general land office is quite lengthy and
covers the entire history OF the grant |
from its Issuance. From it we gather:
! That the grant was made under the
laws Of Mexico and bears |
date January II, 1871, the boundaries !
being marked by mounds and the de- |
scription of the location of these mounds |
being exceedingly vague.
2. On February 81, 1874, the grant was /
on account of the extent of |
land claimed.
s. On April IA. 1914, the suspension
was annulled and revoked
4 On September 20, 1857, the claim |
was reported by the surveyor general to |
congress for confirmation the report re-
citing the boundaries described in the /
grant.
5. On June 81, 1860, congress con-
Iirmed the title to the grant by its num-
Der without any statement, either in the |
act itself, in the report of the committees
Of congress, or in the papers accompany
ing the report, of the quantity of land /
contained in the claim. General bound