Santa Fe daily New Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1885-1897, 1892-10-29
HOW JOSEPH OBTAINED &C, 900 ACRES IN THE
CIENEGUILLA 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 rofuting 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.. DO
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
ly a man in this territory so mixed up
with grant matters as Anthony Joseph.
He owned 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 n nonresident English pur-
chaser. In the purchases both here and
in the Oio Caliente grant there seems to
have been 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 $400, as the price of
his perfdy. 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 $ll3. 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, of
which we have spoken. Then comes the
following:
February 9, 1872, made by Mariana
Romero and eighteen others, considera-
ton 81 each.
February 10, 1872, ], N. Gurule and
thirteen others.
February 10, 1872, Felipe de Jesus Ro-
driguez and nine others.
February 10, 1872, Benito Romero and
thirteen others.
February Is, 1872, Jose Anto. Sandoval
and thirteen others.
March IS, 1872, Juana Maria Urtadc
and six others.
March 18, 1872, Pedro Vigil and wife.
March 10, 1872, Francisco Romero ant
ten others.
March 25, 1872, Ignacio Sanchez ant
e five others.
n April 8, 1872, Pedro suass and tel
n others.
= June "a, 1872. Jose V. Sanchez and fou
: others.
t Any one wishing to investigate will
e find these deeds recorded in Taos count,
It in books A. No. 2, and A, No. 3. Their
e are l13 grantors in all besides Vigil, ant
o each received just 81! Many Of then
e are still living, mostly in poverty, AM
y all feel keenly the wrong practiced oil
e them"