The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1896-01-07
FOR THE ALVARADO ACRES
Forty Years of Litigation Ended
by the Supreme
Court.
THE LAST APPEAL DISMISSED.
A Cloud Which Has Impaired Contra
Costa Land Titles Finally
DiSpe1led.
THE LAST APPEAL DISMISSED

AIVaraQO ldnQ sui, QlleIeu 1O4cNeI 11II-
CATION that has become historically of vast
importance; that is famous over great
part of the United States, and that has
held the attention of courts and lawyers
for over forty years.
The San Pablo rancho, the tract IN
question, originally contained 1900 acres.
1t lies just beyond the northern boundary
of Berkeley, and includes greater part OF
the town of San Pablo.
The first possessor was Francisco Maria
Castro, conimandant some sixty years ago
at Yerba Buena, the site of San Francisco.
His martial services against the Indians
gained him favor with the Spanish Gov
eminent and as a reward he was granted
three square leagues of land, which were
afterward increased to four leagues, on the
east shore of San Pablo and San Francisco
bays, and lying in what is now called Con-
ira Costa County.
Francisco Castro, with his wife and
family, settled on this newly acquired
property near the present little town of
San Pablo on the Southern Pacific Rail
road. An old record states: Castro and
his family, consisting of his wife and ten
children, resided upon, occupied and ex-
ercised acts Of dominion over the land for
eight years"
Castro died in 1881. In his last tesla
ment he bequeathed to his wife GabrieIa
de Castro an equal and undivided half
interest of this vast estate, and to his ten
children and the issue of his deceased
daughter was willed to each one twenty
second share. The old record states
the distribution as ''eleven equal
| il dividual twenty-second parts thereof
to his surviving widow, and one
equal undivided twenty second part
/ - 80 H.
ing, and like undivided twerty-second
part thereof to his grandchildren, heirs of
his deceased daughter Francisco"
All through the subsequent litigation of
the estate this division was rejected.
Joaquin Castro. the eldest son of Fran
cisco Castro, the executor of his father s
will, obtained in 1885 a confirmation of
| the original Government grant, and also
obtained an increase to the estate of an
| other square league, making four leagues
in ell. From this time until 1850 the al
fairs of the estate were conducted on the
| lines the will had laid down.
| Before 1850 three of the ten children
! died and their one twentv-second parts by
| law reverted to their mother. She thus
| became the possessor of fourteen twenty
| second parts of the property.
| Mrs. Castro died in 1851, deciding to heI
favorite daughter, Martina Castro, wife OF
the Mexican Governor of California. Juan
B. Alvarado. Thus Mrs. Alvarado be.
| came the owner of fifteen tWenty-seconds
! of the rancho.
| The other heirs were dissatisfied with
| this partially shown to the eldest daugh-
ter and appealed to the Mexican courts,
which decreed that Mrs. Castro's interest
should only be through life, and that on
her death the property should be divided
I equally among the eight surviving heirs.
This engendered a litigation which con-
| tinued until 1856, when all itigants ap-
| peared satisfied with partition on a basis
| of eighths rather than, as the will orig
inaIly provided, into twenty-seconds.
From this period the real litigation be-
gan, transfers of the land were made by
! the children to white settlers who looked
to the proximity of what promised to be a
metropolis for the establishment of their
| homes.
There appears to have been the greatest
| confusion IN these early transfers. The
! heirs OF Castro in many cases who held
| undivided interests, sold specific areas,
owned and resold this again until in a few
years the affairs of the estate were in a
hopelessly entangled condition.
The partition that was expected In 1856
on the basis of eighths was never effected
and those who had purchased of the Castro
descendants found themselves without
titles to their homes and that they or their
SUCCSSSOIS3 VIZ nG0 uSlO LlS ldlQ 1OI
nearly generation, must relinquish their
rights to other parties showing a priority
of claim.
The Alvarado contingent, aided by bril-
liant legal talent, determined to claim
fifteen twenty-seconds of the entire ranch.
Then followed the dramatic portion OF the
history. Attorneys passed the lie in
court and purchasers who endeavored to
settle on their lands were driven from
their hastily constructed homes. The suit
of Emeric against Alvarado was instituted
in the interest OF the Alvarado title Emeric
had purchased from Mrs. Alvarado.
After wears of litigation, during which
time the case passed from one court to an
other and two or three appeals had been
made to the Supreme Court, an interlocu-
| tory decree was rendered in 1869 by Judge
Mcguire, in which the method of parti-
ton was defined, and his decision was
based directly on the will of old Sergeant
Castro, and the Alvarado claimants secured
fifteen tive nty-seconds OF the rancho.
In 1891 Judge Hebbard appointed three
referees to partition the property among
the numerous claimants who at that time
mum bered over 260. The referees ap-
pointed were John F. Sheehan, Albert d.
Crane and r. ?. Hammond. They found
by survey the ranch to consist of over
$4,000 acres. The son of Joseph Emeric,
who originated the suit, was awarded the
largest share-2500 acres.
In this final distribution many parties
were dissatisfied, and especially with the
large amount to which the fees summed
UP.
Altogether $1O7, 900 was charged as fees
and laid as pro rata lien on the holdings
OF the different claimants; SIS, 900 was paid
for attorneys fees and over $1,000 to re-
munerate SURVEYORS,
The partition was made by the referees
with the aid of Surveyor George F. Allen.
This decree of partition became final. for
although, as has been stated, dissatis-
faction was provoked regarding what was
considered the exorbitant fees and inius.
tice of the discussion, only ".
B. Hellings and wife, who had
purchased their land from Leota
Gutierrez, appealed from this final decree
to the Supreme Court. They claimed thai
certain portions of the land awarded them
by the interlocutory decree of Judge Ma
gulre were not entered in the final decree
after the partition by the referees. The
other defendants of the mammoth suit
dropped out and now the suit ends with
this last dismissal