Santa Fe daily New Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1885-1897, 1893-05-23
JUANA LOPEZ GRANT.
Secretary Hokc Smith Overrules the
Sparks-Julian Order for a Re-
survey of the Grant.
History of Valuable Grant-Import'
ant Official Utterances Indicating
tho Policy of the New Seere-
tary Of the interior

The Mesita do Juana Lopez grant,
covering 42O22.25 acres near Cerrillos, in
south Santa Fe county, has been before
the interior department for five years on
recommendation of the unlamented ex-
Surveyor General Julian for resurvey.
Julian pounced upon this valuable prop
erty soon after his induction into Office in
1886 and the general land Office, then
under control of that other fossil, Andrew
jackson Sparks, concurred blindly in all
he said and did relative to this grant.
Yesterday Surveyor General Hobart re-
! ceived a voluminous decision on the case
from Sec. Hoke Smith, of the interior, in
which the law and the facts are conclsely
and ably set forth and overriding the &C.
ton of the gen raj land Office.
HISTORY OF THE GIANT.
The Juana Lopez grant was made by
the Spanish government in January
1882, to Domingo Romero, Miguel and
Manuel Ortiz, WIG in the same month
were duly placed in possession of the
land petltioned for, and they and their
legal representatives have ever since
been in possession. On September 80,
1872, Surveyor General Proudit investi-
gated the claim In accordance with sec
ton 8 of the act of congress of July %,
1854, and on his Recommendation the
grant, No. Ga, was reported to congress
tor confirmation. Among other papers
submitted ut that time was a sketch map,
from which 1t appeared that the area OF
the grant was ~, l20 acres. A survey OF
the property by Deputy Reeves, however,
showed its actual contents to be 4?,O22.25
acres. This survey was approved by
Surveyor General Atkinson February 29,
1877, aud a certified copy of the same
went to the 45th congress, second session,
by which the grant was confirmed Jan
uary 2S, 1879.
Seven years later the redoubtable Ju-
liam appeared here and shortly after his
arrival letter was sent by him to the
general land Office setting forth that the
grant as surveyed not only included other
grants but large PARTON of the public
domain as well, and by order of Sparks
in an order for new survey. Julian and
Sparks held that the original grant was
for but $4,000 acres, covering only the
mesa lands west of Juana Lopez canon,
which terminates some distance north of
the Galisteo river, whereas by the survey
of Reeves the grant was extended some ten
miles south of the mesa and several miles
south of the Rio Galisteo; they commended
also that the survey was over mile fur
ther west than it should be.
SEQ. SMITHS OPINION.
In his opinion overriding the Sparks
Julian action in ordering a resurvey, Sec.
Hoke Smith says:
ut seems that these objections to the
survey are made SO late that your Office
and this department are precluded from
inquiring into them by the terms of the
act of confirmation, supra. About the
construction Of that act have no doubt.
In my opinion congress confirmed the
grant in accordance with the survey which
had been made and was then as much us
any other part of tho record before that
body. do not think the posi-
tion assumed, as to the intention of con-
gress and its meaning, is tenable. To
hold that the important reference to the
survey in the act was 'interpolated as
merely giving "a history and for the pur-
pose of closer Identification is to either
ignore the preceding language or to as.
sumo that congress did vain thing, is an
assumption not to be tolerated if any
other construction can be adopted.
1.-THE identification of the grant claim
could hardly be more exact than that con-
tanned in the words preceding the men
ton of the survey. Its location is stated,
then the name of the government by
which granted, the day OF the month and
year when made, the fact that it had been
examined, approved and recommended
for confirmation by the officer appointed
by law for that purpose, the date of his
recommendation and the number given
to it by him in the list of private land
claims. What more was needed to com
plete the identification of the grant or
to summarize It's 'history?'"
THE sEoRETARY's VIEWS IN GENERAL.
Covering n wider range and referring
to the legislation of congress confirming
private grants in New Mexico, the secre-
tary uses this language:
mo instance is found of AS complete a
history or of as close an identification of
a grant as the language used in the pres
emit instance before reference is made to
the survey. BY act of December %,
1858, nineteen Pueblo grants, designated
only by name and the letters of the
alphabet and four others by name and
numbers only, are confirmed as reported.
BY act of June 81, 1860, thirty grants de-
scribed only by the number given to
them in the report of tho surveyor gen.
eral and three described by the name of
claimant and number, are confirmed as
reported. In the act of March l., 1861,
only one is mentioned and that is con-
firmed by the number alone, as reported.
The act of June -, 1865, mentions but
one and that is confirmed by number and
name of claimant. By act of February
8, 1869, one by name, as reported, and by
act of March 3, 1869, five by numbers
only. And it is to be observed that in
all the acts quoted there is no reference
to previous survey, hut in two or three
instances surveys are directed to be
made thereafter.
Surely after tho very full description
given in the first part Of the act Of con-
firmation there was no need to recite the
fact of the survey as additional evidence
of Identification. Similar surveys were
doubtless made in other grants and were
before congress, yet no mention Of any
of them is made in contirmatory acts.