Albuquerque daily citizen. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1895-1903, 1900-05-09

iT EgssI VA ..G Nshs

- Va ~ ~ We AFM"N-n."A IA a.
SsuhUl fhl gFaal ~ Seed FsAtIis.
u IVES claimed Cor i1,iep serss sud ID
alleged to have been made on Decemi
Der 81, 1si5. d. -.tr "a
The other mandate was la case 40
w, Antonio Serafin Pena, ct al, vs.. the
United states, involving the La Pc
taca grant, claimed for 1921 acres In
lilo Arriba and Taos counties, and al
legged to have been made on January
~, 1896, The judgment Of the court OF
private land claims rejecting the grant
was reversed and the csse remanded "
the court for a new trial on the extent
OF the allotted lands. The case was
therefore reinststed on the docket OF
the land court for that purpose.
Monday, in case No. 2j0, Mariana $.
otero vs.. the United States, for the
Sitio de Navajo grant In Valencia
county, the court announced a decision
In an elaborate opinion. 1t was shown
by testimony last week hat the lands
claimed are entirely within the Cebolle-
Ia grant, heretofore patented by act OF
congress. This was thought to bar ali
action on the part of the court OF pri-
vate land claims. But the court IN
nounced that this would not prevent
its taking jurisdiction OF the claim.
The Jurisdiction will, however, extend
only to deciding upon the validity OF
the title papers, the court being de-
barred from entering a confirmation by
the act establishing II. The court ae-
cordingly ordered hat owners of Ce-
bollets grant be made parties defend
ant, and upon this being done the case
will be set down for trial.
The same holding was announced by
the court in case No. ia, Margarito
Bsca, eli al, vs.. the United States. for
the San Jose del Encinel grant In Va
lencia county, claimed for 3 1000 acres,
n alleged to have been made In i76s
or 1883. The grant IL also in conflict
| with the cebolleta grant.
In case No. 140, lose Isabel Martinez,
ct al, vs.. the United States, involving
the Juan Jose Lobato grant in Rio Ar
rlba county. claimed for 100, 900 acres
and alleged to have been made on Aug
ust "a, 174O, and which has been con-
frmed by the court Of private land
claims, the court. through Chief Jus
tice Reed, announced its decision on
the application OF the owners of the
grant for money compensation at the
rate of sl,25 per acre for lands patent.
ed under the public land laws of the
United States, within the limits OF the
grant as confirmed. the court holding
that such a position could be sustained
and indicating that on proof OF the ex-
ten OF the lands the court would enter
judgment against the United States.
The amoun involved is about 81. 900.
The government Indicated that an ap-
peal Will be taken from this judgment
when II IL entered.
In case No. 70. on motion Of the gov
eminent. II was decided that a member
of the court should go to the locality
covered by the survey for the purpose
Of taking testimony as to the correct
ness OF the survey executed by Survey
or John II. Walker. and to examine
the boundaries OF the grant as It had
been confirmed. The case IL that OF
Mariana 5, Otero vs.. the United States,
for the Nuestra Sonora de la Luz de
las Lagunltas grant In B~ernalillo coun-
ty. claimed for 1900 acres, and alleged
to have been made july 20, 1852. The
government maintains hat the survey
Is incorrect.
To-day the Conejos grant. involving
about 5000, 900 acres in southern Colo
rado and northern New Mexico was
taken up. This is the most important
grant case that remains undecided.
The claimant Is Crecencio Valdez. The
grant il alleged to have been made In
1888. and on 1t are situated the towns
OF Antonito. Del Norte and Conejos.