Santa Fe daily New Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1885-1897, 1895-10-11
THE PERALTA CLAIM AGAIN.
The Spanish Branch of the Family
Now After the Famous Grant
for 100000 Acres.
AN OFFSET FOR The MORA CLAIM.
Likely to Become Question of Inter-
national Moment - Peralta-
Reavis Explains the
Situation.

A press dispatch from Washington of
recent date announced that the heirs of
Juan Peralta, of Barcelona, Spain, to
whom was granted large tracts of land in
Arizona before the ceding of that terri
tory to the United States, will soon file
suit against the government in the United
States court of claims for recovery of
their property, the claimants being
we'll known New Orleans people, who are
represented by w. R. Stringfellow, of
New Orleans.
Appended was paragraph dealing
with the history of the case, and which set
forth the following facts:
THE ARIZONA CLAIM.
"Juan Peralta, who was an officer in the
Spanish army, was granted 500 arpents
of land in Louisiana on December ~,
1898, by De Lomos, the then the Spanish
governor of the territory of Louisiana.
This gift was supplemented by another
grant of land made February 8, 1899, by
the Madrid government. The grant en-
braced 100000, of acres in Arizona in
the northwest portion of the state, east
of the Gila river. The claimants allege
that Juan Pera,ta was married to Marie
De Los Delos, of Farmosa, in Havana,
Cuba, after which marriage he came to
New Orleans, where he resided up to
short time before his death, which took
place in Barcelona. They further claim
hot bo korrit0rv Cf T,nuiosono on1 A ~.
IONA acquired by the United States WAS
after the date of the Spanish grant to
Peralta, and hence that no title to the
United States could be given for the
property in the grant to Peralta, except
by him or his heirs, which has not been
DONE"
To-day NEW MEXICAN representative
called at the U. s. prison and LAID the
above before j. A. Peralta- Reavis, whose
claim for the same property was lately
declared fraudulent by the U. s. land
court, with the req uest that he shed some
light on this newest phase of the oele-
brated case.
PERALTA-REAvIs' STATEMENT.
Mr.. Reavis said:
"The claimants referred to in the dis
patch are what have been known as the
Cuban branch Of the Aragonian Peraltas,
which may be said to be the mother-seat,
a little place known as Peralta, in Aragon,
where first lived the Carrillos, who were
the original Peraltas. In the branch
representing the true title of the Barony
of Arizona the name Peralta is only
claimed and held as title or nom de
plume. This Cuban branch, domiciled
adverse to the Willing title, which rep
resent, in the early 'SOs, Immediately upon
the discovery that the author of the Pc
ralta-Wiling deed was too young to pos
sib!y represent that title in fee, AID in
1885, one of that family visited Arizona
while Surveyor General johnson was in
Office and committed such information to
the surveyor general for the privilege of
a review of the papers, then on file, as en-
abled that illustrious official to form what
I have always characterized as the sur
veyor generals syndicate of Arizona
and from which radiated in every direc-
ton the wonderful discovery of
FRAUDS In THE REAL TITLE
of the Barony of Arizona. 1t will be re-
membered that johnson had sent photo
graphic copies of the originals as they
were claimed to Spain early in 1884.
Nothing more was heard of this branch
of the family until in 1886 it was learned
in Seville that Manuel Peraita, of Costa
RIGA, had represented this interest there
and had been engaged during the pre-
vious two years in compiling history of
Costa Rioa, and incidentally looking up
the Peralta family and their interests.
"No additions were made to this
branch of claimants until it was learned
by the attorneys, composing this survey
or-general's syndicate that Doctor Jaun
Peralta, grand son of old Don Luis Per-
alta, with other relatives, intended to tes-
tify in behalf of the present claimants,
but upon investigation it was discovered
or determined that the lineal descent
could not be traced to an affinity; there
fore their evidence was not considered
paramount, and w. W. Allen insisted that
they would join the adverse claimants if
their attorneys were not suitably retained,