Santa Fe daily New Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1885-1897, 1896-12-01
U. s. LAND COURT.
Two Important Opinions Handed
DOwn-Sierra MOsca Grant Con.
firmed-SimpsOn'sC Claim
Rejected.

ReJected.
The United States court of private land
claims met this morning at the federal
building as usual with Chief Justice Reed
presiding and all the associate Justice
present.
In the Sierra Mosca or j. L. Ortiz grant
case, wherein Luis M. Ortiz ct al claimed
33,25O39 acres in Santa Fe county, Judge
Fuller handed down the ma jority opinion
of the court confirming to the claimants
eleven square leagues of land, but at the
same time pronouncing the grant an i'm
perfect one.
Judge Murray vigorously dissented
from this opinion, contending: (1 That,
under the colonization laws at that time
the governor had no power to make
grants; that (2), if the governor had pos
sessed the needed power, not single re-
quirement was complied with in making
this grant, and (3) that the signature of
Armijo was forgery and a bungling one
at that.
In this case maj ority of the court de-
cided that expert testimony and that
Photographic copies of Armijo's sigma
ture were competent.
Chief Justice Reed also handed down
an opinion of the court rejecting the
Orejas del Llano de los Aguajes grant in
Taos county. This case was decided in
accordance with the decision in the An
tonic Chaves grant case, wherein it was
held that from the years 1924 to 1928 no
officer in New Mexico had authority to
make grants of land, and the Orejas de
Llano de los Aguajes grant was made in
1926. The forgery question was not
raised IN the opinion.
On motion of the government several
DEGREES confirming grants, heretofore en-
tered up, were 80 amended and corrected
as to reserve to the government the min
erals on such grants.
RED RIVER GRANT REJECTED.
As previously announced in these
columns, the U. s. court of private land
claims yesterday handed down an opin-
ion rejecting the grant in case No. l66,
wherein Clarence P. Elder, of Denver,
claims 42,939 acres in Taos county under
the title of Canon del Rio Colorado grant.
On the property involved are very valu-
able gold mining claims along the Red
river which have of late attracted much
attention from outside capitalists and
from mining men generally throughout
northern New Mexico and southern Colo
RADIO. The opinion in full is appended:
In THE COURT OF PRIVATE LAND CLAIMS, I
Santa Fe, New Mexico, August Term, 1896.
Clarence EN- ZAP p. Elder Canon del Rio Colorado
United States. Grant.
Opinion of the court delivered by JOS
eph R. Reed, G. j., November 30, 1896.
am directed to announce the judg-
ment of the court in the case of Clarence
P. Elder VS.. The United States, No. 1876,
for the confirmation of the Canon del Rio
Colorado grant.
The plaintiff claims under what he al
leges to be an apportionment made in
1886 by the constitutional alcalde under a
grant made in 1915.
The documentary evidence introduced
shows that in June, 1886, the alcalde put
certain parties in possession of the land,
but it shows also that in doing so it was
assumed that the power to make a grant
was vested in the prefecture, and it con-
talns no reference to the grant Of 1915.
1t appears to be an original and indie
pendent proceeding, and the plaintiffs
rights must be determined with reference
to that proceeding as it is shown.
The documents introduced in evidence
show that the alcalde, or project, placed
these parties in possession of the land.
Subsequently in 1S41 the governor of the
territory advised that the prayer could
not be granted by reason of the report
made by the Judge of their jurisdiction,
that the grant conf1icted with the rights
of other parties. Following that is a
statement by the prefecture, or rather
a report by the prefecture, stating the
fact that the report by the justice of the
peace had been MADE and that it was
based solely upon the fact that the grant
if made would interfere with the rights
of others who lived in the vicinity. And
following that is communication from
the secretary of the territory which states
that he is directed by the governor to
say that the privilege of making the
grant and the power to make it Is vested
In the departmental junta, but that in
consideration that the action which had
been made might not be without effect,
he had ordered that the owners or parties
placed in possession might be permitted
to remain, and that he would submit the
report to the authorities, as also the fact
that the governor had denied the per-
mission to make the grant.
1t does not appear by any subsequent
action that the case was ever submitted |
10 the junta, or if submitted, was ever
'cted on by that body. So that the case
10 far as the rights of the petitioner are
concerned, stands upon the action of the
prefecture alone, and it is therefore
imply grant by the prefecture. Fol
owing our holdings in other cases where
pe held that they had no authority to
make grants, tho petitionwill be dis
missed.
(Signed) JOSEPH R. REED,
Chief Justice.
Santa Fe, New Mexico, November 80,
500.