Santa Fe daily New Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1885-1897, 1894-09-28
NEW MEXICAN HISTORY


occurred upon that same mesa, within
| that same old pueblo, in relation to the
Cochiti indians, namely, the final over
| throw of the Indians on the reconquest of
| New Mexico. 1t was this fact then which
gave names to the mesa and the canon and
the stream, and how cGuld it fail to i'm
part the same name to the pueblo? His
| tory as well as the evidence in this case
shows that il did do so. The evidence
shows that the point at which Lucero act
ually located in pursuance of the grant
is considerably south of the line of the
old pueblo, and that nearly, if not quite
all, of the land which has been occupied
for cultivation by his descendants and
successors during the century and half
intervening from that time to the present
lies south of such line. When Lucero
made his petition for this grant he seems
to have stood in
| THE FLATS OF ALBUQUERQUE,
and not upon the heights of the Cochiti
mesa overlooking the distant pueblo
! Viejo, as counsel for plaintiffs supposes.
With the tract Of land he sought and de-
scribed, he associated in his mind the
mesa and the canon and the stream, and it
was but natural that he should also asso-
ciate with them the old pueblo which was
the very thing which gave all of them
prominence and distinction.
1t was not unnatural that he should fix
the line of the old pueblo on the mesa as
the north line of the land he was descrb-
ing. We think it would be strained and
| tN hat ~,
his mind he disassociated all these things
from the pueblo on the mesa and associ-
ated them with the ruins of the pueblo
Viejo, of the existence of which there is
no evidence he had any knowledge, either
actual or historical. But there is another
standpoint from which this question
must be viewed. There was another mind
, beside Lucero's involved in this transac-
tiCn, and that was the mind of the gov
ornor. 1t required the assent of both
minds in order to consummate this grant.
At the time Lucero's petition was pre-
sented to the governor only thirty-four
years had elapsed since the bloody and
dec sve tragedy enacted in the pueblo,
on the mesa Cochiti The whole history
of it
FROM THE PEN OF DE VARGAS
was in the archives under his own hand
and custody. We must believe that the
event and the place were as familiar to
him as are any of the important events
and places of our own civil war to us.
When this petition was presented to the
governor, grouping, as it did, in close
association the mesa and the pueblo as
land marks by which he was to determine
the proprlety Of making this grant, is
there reason to say that in his mind he
disassociated the mesa from the pueblo
standing upon it, and associated it with
another of which there was no suggestion
in the petition? We can not bring our
minds to such conclusion. On the
contrary, the conclusion seems ire
sstable, in view of the circumstances,
that when the governor inspected the
petition he had no other thought than
that the old pueblo of Cochlti, situated on
the mesa of Cochiti, was intended as the
north boundary. If Lucero really in
tended to make the northern pueblo the
monument of his north line, then we
must say that his petition
WAS POSITIVELY MISLEADING
to the governor. There was evidence that
by general repute the north boundary
was located at the northern pueblo,
spoken of in the case as the Pueblo
Vie;o.
Evidence of general repute as to the
location of boundary is entitled to con-
sideration. The general repute proven
in this case, in its source and in it's extent,
was confined to the descendants and sue
cessors of the original grantee, chiefly the
owners of the grant, and interested in the
expansion of its limits. Under such cir
cumstances we can not regard this owl
dence of much convincing force.
The record of some proceedings before
an alcalde In 1885 in which he undertook
to determine the superiority of right be-
tween the Luceros and some cavalry Of
ficer to pasture stock in the Canada de en-
Medic were introduced in evidence.
The alcalde recites in effect that
the Luceros are owners of the tract I'M
der grant, and have better right to the
pasture in question than the cavalry. 1t
is claimed for this proceeding that 1t
shows that the Luceros were the owners
of the Canada de en- Medic under the
grant, which being north of the line of |
the pueblo on the mesa Cochiti,
JUsTIFIEs THE CONCLUSION
that that pueblo was not the one intended
as the north boundary.
To have any effect as evidence this pro-
ceeding of the alcalde must be considered
in the light of an adjudication against
the crown, or as an admission binding |
upon the crown.
We have stated our opinion that an al
calde could not adjud1cate upon the right
of the crown to its land.
We think it equally clear that an al
calde could not perform any act which
could be regarded as an admission against |
interest by the crown.
To authorize an agent or officer to
bind, or create evidence against his prin-
cipal affecting the title to property, it
must appear that he was authorized to
effect the same purpose by direct action.
Alcaldes had no power to in the least ex
tent dispose of the public lands of the
crown. They could neither grant nor ad-
judicate nor admit away the little of the
crown to any portion of its public land.
We cdh NOV cousluer Vnese proceedings y!
the alcalde as evidence in the case.
The claim will be cofrmed in the name
of the original grantee Antonio Lucero
for the benefit of all parties in interest.
The east boundary will be the River del
Norte; the south boundary will be the line
of the Indian lands; the north boundary
will be the old pueblo of Cochiti on the
mesa Cochiti; and the west boundary will
be the same pueblo. This conclusion is