Santa Fe daily New Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1885-1897, 1893-08-09
THE I. S. LAND COURT.
Able Arguments Presented Yesterday
Constitutional Right of Appeal
Brought Into Question.

y
terday, Mr.. Catron began his argument
in opposition to the confirmation of the
pasture grant to the Pueblos of Za,
Santa Ana and Jemez, and as usual made
a close and careful argument He con-
tended under cover of De Castro and
Cambustin, that there was not sufficient
proof of any grant because the document
offered did not come from the original
files or archives; that the purchases from
Baca, who had a junior grant, were bona
fide purchases and entitled to protection;
that they were protected also by the
statutes of limitation of the territory !;
that the Indians had filed their grant with
the surveyor general in 1855, under the
act of 1854, and withdrawn it; and that
this amounted to abandonment; that the
grant had never been approved to them
by the proper Spanish authorities; and in
any event was not grant in fee but only
license to pasture.
Mr.. Earle, who had made full opening
for the Indians on Monday, made an
elaborate reply to this, suggesting to the
court the great importance of their deci-
sions in these cases, as there was grave
doubt of the constitutional right of ap-
peal to the supreme court. The land
court is not legal or constitutional
court he contended; on the contrary, it
is national commission exercising a
power that belongs to congress as the
political branch of the government, hav-
ing absolute control over the execution
of treaties and the enforcement of treaty
obligations. This power congress had
delegated to this land court rs the su-
preme court has heretofore decided it
can be delegated. Tho cases here being
tried do not "arise in law or equity"
and the judicial power of the United
States Is limited by paragraph 2, article
8, of the constitution. The Jurisdiction
of this court is over matter that belongs
to congress. If this be court it is
one of law, wherein the statute
prescribes what the petition, prayer
and decree shall contain, and the
effects of its judgment. It has no equity
jurisdiction and can not consider alleged
equities as to perfect and imperfect
grants, because as between them the only
question is whether the grant is regular
and valid under Spanish and Mexican
law, and without regular and legal de-
nouncement thereafter. 1t can not be
affected by anything done or omitted
since the change of flag. The confirma-
tlon OF perfect grant is simply decla
t1on that 1T was valid at the date; and
there may be two grants covering the
same land entitled to confirmation as of
their respective dates. Should congress
attempt to aflix any limitations or con-
ditions to a perfect grant it would be
prostituting the national honor pledged
in solemn treaty. Before the court
concludes that congress meant to pass a
law SO clearly unconstitutional, allowing
1t to dispose of citizen's''property with
out due process of law" it must consider
whether there is not some other construc-
ton of this provision, by constituting the
whole law in pari materia. The supreme
court says these inchoate grants are mere
equities and are to be enforced equitably.
To them it has also decided that congress
can aflix conditions; but such conditions
and limitations do not at all apply to
perfect grants. Adopting this construc-
ton all the provisions of the statute
erecting the court can be held constitu-
tional.
The statute of limitations can not APP
ply to any grant, Spanish or Mexican, for
the supreme court has long ago decided
that none of these grants could be sub
ject to adjudication until they had been
confirmed. The statute of limitation is
never put in operation until the rights of
action accrue.
Mr.. Howard followed in a very close
argument contending that this grant
was perfect one and reviewing the
facts of the case.
The case was then submitted and taken
under adyisement.
This morning the court took up No.
30, the Casas de Riano, or Piedra Lumbre
grant, in Rio Arriba county, for $4,000,
acres, Aniceto Martinez, ct al, claimants.
Messrs. Howard, Jeffries and Earle, ap-
pear as of record, and Mr.. Catron in
tervenes Testimony as to the validity
of the grant is being introduced and the
case will probably occupy the rest of the
day.