Los Angeles daily herald., 1889-08-30

I17S1, and repudiated in 1923 by Mexico.
Since the parties received new grants
under the terms of the Act OF 1924, il
follows that this act only Ia the source
from whence title is derived.
| For the information of your readers
we copy 80 much of the Act of 1924 by
the Mexican Government as bears upon
the subject:
decree No. 72) Art. 8. The Legis-
latures of all the States will as soon
as possible form colonization laws or reg
ulations for their respective States, con-
forming themselves to the Constitutional
Act, General Constitution, and the rsgu-
lations established in this law"
Art. 4. "There cannot be colonized
any lands comprehended within twenty
leagues of the limit of any foreign gov
ernment, nor within ten leagues of the
coast, without the previous appreciation
or the general supreme executive power"
Art. IL. "The supreme executive
power may ALLEVIATE any portion of land
in favor of any officer, whether civil or
military, of the federation, from the
vacant lands of the territories"
Art. IL. SIT shall not be permitted to
unite in the same hands with the right
of property more than one league square
of land suitable for irrigation, four square
leagues in superfce of arabic land with
out the facilities of irrigation, and six
square leagues of grazing land"
Mexico, August 18, 1924.
CAYETANo IBARRA, President.
PEDRO AHURUADA, Mem. and Sec'y.
MANUEL DE VILLAY CoCIo, Mem. and
Sec'y.
new grants which they received, not as
mere evidence of former subsisting
title, but in the form and under the terms
and subject to the conditions imposed by
the law of 1924" says the decision"
Having now the law Of 1924 before US
let us inquire whether the "terms and
conditions" imposed have been complied
with.
If the lands are located within the
marine limit reserved, 'ten leagues"
(about twenty miles) from the coast,
upon grant not having the "previous
appreciation of the supreme executive
power" of Mexico, it is void from the
beginning. (See decision of Mexican
courts of Coahuila and Texas Saltillo,
September 4th, 1920.
If the land is located in any of the
Territories of the federation" the grant
must appear to be the act of the "su-
preme executive power" as provided by
Act IL.
If more than "eleven leagues" is united
in the same hands, it is void since a
greater quantity is not permitted by Act
IL Of the law referred to.
1t was the opinion of the Hon. W. A.
j. Sparks, late Land Commissioner, and
others in authority during the admins
trstion of President Cleveland, that much
of the public domain in this State had
been iudiciaUy determined to be private
property; under the pretext that such
ands were "Mexican grants" prior to
the treaty of February 2, 1S4s. Readers
of the HERALD may form very correct
conclusion whether or not such opinions
are we'll founded by a careful review of
the above. If judgment has been
willfully perverted in this "decision," +"
whereby the people. and the Govern;
ment are deprived OF public lanI, and
their homestead rights under the law,
what remedy have we? The decision"
does not even pretend to trace the grant
one Pedro Fagas the reputed military
0OfOIAOI VI thO OOp6ItnCn VI ppOI
California;" and to other "Governors" OF
the same sort. 1t then sets this author
ity aside; yet sets up title in "new
grant" under the ''terms of the act OF
1924" from no source whatever, having
authority to represent the sovereignty Of
Mexico, as provided by the act referred
to.
The writer would ask, could any man
of ordinary common sense, sworn as a
juror to decide, according to law and
evidence, who is acquainted with the 10.
cation of the Las Bolsas and other
rahchos named in the decision, after re-
viewing the law of 1924 and knowing the
grant" had not the appreciation Of the
supreme executive power" as therein
required, give his verdict to oust the
settler therefrom without feeling that he
had perjured himself.
In view of all the premises covered by
the ruling, the "decision" fails to con-
vince reasonable minds in possession OF
the law and the facts, that the land now
covered by these so.called Mexican
grants" is not, in truth and in fact, q
part of the public domain acquired by
| the treaty Of 1S48. BALL.
Norwalk, CAL, August 20, 1889.