The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1892-09-04

- =% :.
ants, specifies a few disputed. .ownershies
. and shGwssIhat no effectual partition OF the
rancho "amQng the. ,heffs.or deYisees aud
those Claiming: under them was; ever made !;
that each of the defendants lays: claim. to
some. undivided In terest: in the premises as
. tenants in. common: With plaintiff, derived
from one or another of the heirs Of Fran
cisco Maria: Castro. or sqme lien:or iIscum-
/ .branco upon Some undivided Interest
/ therein. the extent and: nature of which
plaintiff had been unable to ascertain: 8 :.
The SUCCEEDING clause Of the complaint
takes the ground. that as many Of the inter.
esfs are adverse and conflicting. itwould be
inconYenient, ifDot inipraclleablP, to;make
n complete partition of the rancho In the
|. first instance, wherefore. it suggests that
PARTITION of: the:pfenilses be made first, ac-
cordIng To the respective interests Of the
original heirs and devisees Of francisco
Mario Castro, and that these subsequently
be divided or partltioned among the de-:
PENDANTS found te be: entitled thereto; acs
cordrng'to theirTespectyet INTEREST .
Next, it is alleged that about one third Of
tie acreage Of the rancho is hfll land, sulta.
bic only for pastGragei the remaining two:
thirds: being firSt-class arabic land that
some portions Of the tract are well watrred,
while others are destitute Of springs.
stteams or ponds; that Que. portion is par
tlculary valuable by reason of its con-
tiGuity 10 the navigable waters of the bay
of San Francisco. while pibers are less
valuable owing to distance and the con-
fguration Of the land which hamper the
farmer in getting his produce to market. =.
Another allegation shows that many of
the defendants entitled TO freehold inter
ests in the land and in possession Of poF-
tioHs OF the tract, by themselves or through
their tenants, aye.not so possessed la pro
portion to their interests, some holding pos
session of parcels OF greater extent or
greater value than. they are eQuitabiY en-
81 nj
smaller or less valuable portions than their
respective Interests should represent.
Further complications ara shown in an
other clause OF the complaint dealing with
the State and county taxes. The whole
ranch was assessed as single tract at tie
sum Of S179.3S0 upon which tax was i'm
posed in the fiscal year of 1866 CT of
5000 46. Several OF the parties in interest
paid their just proportion of the tax. but
many Others refused TO meet their oblfga-
ton In that respect, and in consequence of
their neglect suit was brought blythe county
to sell the rancho for the unpaid balance
OF the tax. Similsr proceedings for like
cause were Instituted in succeeding years
and were undetermined at the commence
rhent of this suit, thereby prejudcing the
rights of the plaintiff and other parties in
interest.
For these and other reasons plaintiff be-
ileVed IL was necessary To appoint q re-
ceiver OF the rents and profits of the ranch
during the pendency of the action, for the
benefit of all Interested therein and out of
the moneys thus collected to pay the taxes
and other Leg innate charges subject to the
direction of the court.
In conclusion plaintiff prayed that said
defendants. and also all persons unknown
having any interest or estate in said prem
ises or any lien or incumbrance therein. he
summoned to appear and answer the COM
plant; that the share or interest of each of
the parties be ascertainod and determined