Santa Fe daily New Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1885-1897, 1892-10-28
HOW JOSEPH OBTAINED 40, 900 ACRES IN THE
CIEEEGUlLLA GRANT.

HOW JOSEPH OBTAINED 40, 900 ACRES IN THE |
CIENEGUlLLA GRANT.
On Monday, the 9Th day of October,
1881, the NEW MEXICAN published the
editorial below reproduced. If the state
ments therein were not true, Mr.. Joseph
has allowed eight years to pass by with
out refuting them. That he has not done
so, is certainly strong evidence, that the
charges are true, and hence they are re-
produced;
I'VE have heretofore mentioned Mr.. Jo-
seph's ownership in two large grants,
both awaiting confirmation, to show how
identified he is with land grants, and how
largely his interests would naturally affect
his legislation on that subject.
Facts recently brought to our attention
show his record in this respect to be far
more Objectionable than we had sup
posed 1t now seems that there is scarce
| ly a man in this territory so mixed up
with grant matters ms Anthony Joseph.
He owned a part of the Maxwell grant
seven miles wide along the Uraca river,
and running back to an unlimited extent
'to the top of the mountains He bought
a quantity of shares in the Chama grant
to speculate on, paying almost nothing to
the poor owners, and selling for large
price to a nonresident English pur-
chaser. In the purchases both here and
in the Ojo Caliente grant there seems to
have been a good deal of crookedness,
and we expect to give all the details be-
fore long.
But by far the worst business is as to
the Cieneguilla grant, and shows the land
shark and supporter of doubtful grants
combined. 1t seems that early in 1872
Joseph commenced the buying of shares
in this grant. In order to influence the
poor and ignorant owners, one share
holder named Vigil became party to the
transaction, receiving a considerable
amount, said to be 800, as the price OF
his pertidy. The heirs of the grantees,
over 100 in number, were then seen, and
induced by various presentations, all OF
which proved false, to sign deeds to their
interests for the miserable pittance of 81
each Some say they signed because they
thought the deed was only right of way
on a road others that they expectedto re-
ceive their proper proportion afterwards
But none ever received a cent after that
time, and the deeds were drawn so as to
cover all the right, title and interest OF
the settlers, only reserving their little
garden patches. Thus over 10000 acres
were obtained for only $l13. A more
cruel deception could not well be imagined
for these heirs were poor, and through
their poverty and misplaced confidence
were induced to sell. If anyone doubts
the facts, the deeds are to be seen as fol
lows, all being made to Anthony JOSEPH
and company, and all carrying the entire
right and title of the grantors:
The first deed is one from Vigil, o
which we have spoken, Then comes thu
following:
February 0, 1872, made by Mariana
e Romero and eighteen others, considera
ton 81 each
February 10, 1872, j. N. Gurule anc
thirteen others.
February.1O, 1872, Felipe de Jesus Ro
driguez and nine others.
February 10, 1872, Benito Romero anc
thirteen others.
February IS, 1872, Jose Anto. Sandova
and thirteen others.
March IS, 1872, Juana Maria Urtad'
and six others.
March IS, 1872, Pedro Vigil and wife,
March 10. 1872, Francisco Romero AM
, ten others.
March %, 1872, Ignacio Sanchez AM
five others.
April 8, 1872, Pedro Suass and tel
others.
u June 24, 1872. ] ose V. Sanchez and fou
, others.
Any one wishing to investigate vii
find these deeds recorded in Taos count
in books A, No. 2, and A, No. 3. Their
are 113 grantors in all besides Vigil, an
each received just 81! Many of ther
u are still living, mostly in poverty, an
all feel keenly the wrong practiced o
them."