Santa Fe daily New Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1885-1897, 1892-03-02
THE u. S. LAND COURT.
several Vital Questions Involved in
an Opinion Expected to be Hand-
ed Down Tomorrow.

The U. S. court OF private land claims
got down to business in earnest this fore
noon by hearing argumentsin test case,
the decision in which will be far-reaching
in its effects, and establish precedent
whereby the attorneys may know lst how
to proceed in drawing the petitions OF
claimants. The matter came up on the
petition Of ], M. c. Chavez "and the
other claimants of the Colorado land
grant" The petition sets forth in the sim
pIest, brefest manner, the location OF the
grant as being in Rio Arriba county and
bounded as follows: "On the north by the
copper hills, on the south by the Chama
river, on the east by the lands OF Manuel
Bustos and on the west by the small hill
(Cerrto) opposite the town of Abiquiu;"
also that the grant has been approved and
the original papers are on file in the sur
yeyor generals office. The origin of the
grant is thus spoken Of in the petition:
That on the 25th day of June, 1898,
the grant of land was made to Rosala
VALDEZ, Ignacio Valdez and Juan Lorenzo
Valdez, by Don Gaspar Domingo de Men
doza, governor and captain general of the
then Spanish province of New Mexico,
acting under authority of the king OF
Spain; that the grantees were placed in
possession by Capt Diego Torres, under
instructions OF the said governor and
captain general" that it is agricultural
land, etc.
To this petition demurrer was filed by
the U. s attorney, Hon, M. Il, Ray
nolds, setting forth that the petition
is defective in that it does not name the
other claimants, joint owners or occu-
pants under tie same alleged title; Goes
not state the substance OF the royal order
or authority from the kingtf SpaIIfto.the
captain general of New Mexico to make
such grant; that petition does not state
the conditions under which the grant was
made nor set forth that they have been
compiled with; that the description anc
boundaries of the grant are vague aud nd
finite, and that in other respects the peti
ton is 30 informal, indefinite and insui
licient that decree of confirmation cur
not be based thereon.
U. Attorney Reynolds: made an argu
ment before the court in support of th'
points set up his demurrer, and pressed
. the point respecting the naming OF al
clajmats in petitions, and also insisted
that the complete authority of the pro
, vincial officers to make such grants
. extracts from the law, and definite bound
J airy lines be laid down in the petition
, Mr.. Catron argued, on the other han'
, that it WIS not necessary to name eacl
claimant, as this court had no power t.
l adjudcate between claimants, and an
owner of grant or set OF owners had
right to ask for its confirmation.
c 1t was further argued that in the matte
1 OF setting out in the petition the law unde
: which grants are made and the authorit
from the Spanish rulers, such was nc
Q incumbent upon the grant claimants a
e the court was bound to take Judicial motto
8 of the laws in the case. Also as relate
p to definitely describing the boundaries
: MIR. Catron contended that, under intel
/ national customs and laws, the natural oil
: iects were quite sufficient and must COVER
s in describing grant as they are set fort
o in the original papers.
+ F. W. Clancy, attorney for the Abb
t querque community grant, and q. Iii
l. Howard, who has several cases before til
court, also spoke in answer to the U. {
q attorneys demurrer. The court took tt
h matter under consideration and may han
1t down its opinion on these importal
!, points at 10 o'clock tomorrow.