Santa Fe daily New Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1885-1897, 1894-04-14

Astiazarn VS.. Santa Rita Land Mining
company, appealed from the supreme
court of Arizona and published in No. l4S,
U. s. Reports. Here is case in many
respects identical in its features with that
existing to-day between the mine owners
at Cochiti and the grant claimants. 1t
was suit to quiet plaintiffs title to GER
tain lands within tract alleged to have
been granted one Aguilar by the Mexican
government in 1874, and which grant had
been submitted to congress on recon-
it be confirmed, but upon which congress
had never taken any action. In deciding
the case the
U. S. SUPREME COURT
held that "the duty of providing the mode
of securing these private rights, and of
fulfilling the obligations imposed upon
the United States by the treaties, belonged
to the political department of the gov
ernment; that congress might either itself
discharge that duty or delegate it to the
judicial department" Then the court
says: "The case is one of those jurisdic-
tion of which has been committed to a
particular tribunal and which can not,
therefore, at least while proceedings are
pending before that tribunal, be taken up
and be decided by any other y
and while they are pending, the question
OF the title of the petitioners can not be
contested in the ordinary courts of JUS
tice."
Under this view of the case it is con-
tended that, the Canada de Cochiti grant
being now pending for settlement of title
before the U. S. land court, no territorial
court would
HAVE JURISDICTION TO ENJoIN
the mine claimants there from going on
and operating their properties, and that
they are absolutely safe from all molesta-
ton under color of legal proceedings is
suing out of the territorial courts until
the land court, especially empowered by
congress to determine such matters, shall
have passed upon the validity of the land
grant.
With this decision of the U. s. supreme
court staring them in the face, it is not
likely that the attorneys for the grant
claimants would jeopardize their case in
the higher court by moving for any in
junction in the lower court. Nor is this
all, for should they attempt to secure such
injunction they would be met even in the
lower court with such
AN AVALANCHE OF EVIDENCE
against their claim as to very materially
weaken their cause when it came up for
hearing in the land court. For instance,
if the lower court even felt that it had
jurisdiction, it would be bound to take
notice that both surveyors general, At
kinson and Julian, reported against the
Canada de Cochiti grant claim; that the
proofs SO far taken and on file in the
Office of the surveyor general show evil
dence of fraud in making the survey; that
the names Of the witnesses attached to the
original Spanish alcalde's certificate are
rank forgeries, and that there is to-day in
existence statement by officers of the
Spanish army setting forth that they
had registered piece of land in the
Canada de Cochiti which had formerly
been granted to one Antonio Lucero In
ancient times, but that the same had been
abandoned by Lucero."
These and many other matters of like
purport would all come up in the terri
torial court in case any attempt was made
to retard the growth and development
of the Cochiti district by injunction pro-
ceedings.