The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-12-25
A Tale
OF the Land
Titles of
San Francisco
And Vicinity.
Written for
"The Call"
BY L. r. EIIert.

| San Francisco is paradise OF adverse
| land titles. bly, there is no city in
| the world wherein there has been so much
litigation over the title to and possession
of real estate as in this. The cause, as
| everybody knows who has investigated
the subject, was due to the meeting ill
mortal combat of two diverse systems Of
acquiring real property. The Mexican
| pueblo or vilage-site system, by which
residenters obtained title to their homes
by grant from the Alcalde or Mayor, and
the United States presumption system, by
which possession and occupancy were made
the test of mans right to get patent,
could hardly be reconciled. There was
but one way to settle a dispute over them,
and that way was adopted. The Mexican
system was sustained on the theory that
being here first it was supported by the
treaty with Mexico ana the laws in pursu-
ance of that treaty.
Out of this has grown innumerable adj
verse titles. Ordinarily in purchasing
real estate man is compelled TO look out
only for defective probate proceedings,
misdescriptions and membranes, but in
San Francisco he must be constantly on
the watch lest somebody turns up with
title to his land. 1t seems strange but 1t
is nevertheless fact that in this City
there is scarcely piece OF property, GER
tainly not within the charter line OF 1851,
which at some time has not been the sub
ject of a suit to quiet title or an action in
ejectment arising out of conflicting claim.
The business of the California Title In
surance and Trust Company, with which
l am connected, is composed largely OF
land transactions. Its officers and attor-
neys are constantly engaged in land lltiga-
ton of all kinds and they are required to
know all about the origin and progress of
land titles in this City. To one who has
never intimately studied the subject it
presents a maze that is well-nigh incom-
prehensible, and l will venture to say
that you can almost count the lawyers of
this City upon the fingers of your hands
who are what may be said to be thor
oughiy up in San Francisco land titles.
think it would be interesting to briefly
sketch the story of the origin of the tenure
by which the present owners in San Fran
cisco hold their property. One cannot do
SO in the space of newspaper article with
out being necessarily brief and inaccurate,
but, at the risk of being too brief, l will
try and do so.
When the pioneers landed in the mud at
the foot of Montgomery street their notion
of land tenures in this City was founded
upon their experience in the Eastern States.
There the land was derived from the Gov
eminent and all man needed TO do in or
der to get title was to pre-empt, perfect
his possession and pay the Government
the price asked. The pioneers proceeded
to settle San Francisco on this basis. They
had shadowy notion that in some way
Mexican grants legalized by the treaty of
Guadalupe Hidalgo might interfere with
prescriptions, but having profound faith
in the Justice and liberality of their Gov
eminent they did not at first think the
Mexican CLAIMS were worth much consid
Grafton. The general idea, in brief, was
that the lands of the City were public
lands and the Government would some
time give their possessors title. While the
subject was in an unsettled state the City
authorities put forth claim that the City
was Spanish pueblo, consisting of four
square leagues, and that the pretemptors
must get their title from the City.
In order to protect the grantees of the
| Mexican Government, Congress estab-
! Iished commission and instructed it to
proceed to this City and ascertain the
merits of the controversy. A long discus
sion of the claim took place, which re-
| suited in the pueblo title being sustained
! by the commission. Subsequently it was
taken to the United States Circuit Court
and there affirmed by Justice Field. This
settled the pueblo title, and the practical
proposition was then presented of finding
| the boundaries of the pueblo. These
! boundaries brought on the celebrated con-
flict between the State and the pueblo
titles, which settled down finally to the
lands along Mission Creek. Two surveys
were made. The first one was by Stratton,
who, for the southern boundary, followed
the sinuosites of the creeks around Mis-
sion Bay. Won Light subsequently, in
accordance with instructions from the
Land Office at Washington, ran straight
line across the peninsula for the southern
boundary His line was a little farther
north and was surveyed so as to include
within the pueblo the necessary four square
leagues.
Under the Mexican Government large
tract of land, bounded on the west by
Larkin and Eleventh streets and on the
north by Mission Bay lands, had been
granted by the Town Council of San Fran
cisco to applicants for residence purposes.
The Alcaldes who held office under the
same Government had also had power to
make similar grants, subject to confTma-
ton by the Town Council, or, as it was
called the GA yuntamieptOD
There were three American Alcaldes,
namely, Leavenworth, Geary and Hyde,
all of whom had made extensive conces-
sions in pursuance of these grants. After
the incorporation of the City these grants
were confirmed by the Legislature, so that
the grantees were enabled to obtain theil
title also through the pueblo.
In 1853 the City Council passed what
was known as the Van Ness ordinance
This granted all of the City's title within
the then City limits under the pueblo tc
those in possession at that date. Thi:
order was confirmed by the Legislature il