Santa Fe new Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1898-1951, 1902-02-14
LAND GRAB.
B|NG SCHEME
The Interstate Land Company Wants 10 GobbIs
Up Twenty Million Acres in Eastern
New Mexico
ITS OBJECT UNDERSTOOD
II Has Not the Shadow of Title to the Land But De-
sres 10 Tie II Up In the Courts for Several Years
In the Meanwhile Leasing the Land
to Cattlemen.

| Washington date publishes the follow
ing expose of the questions OF the In
terstate Land Company which Is ask
ing congress to pass bill to submit to
the court of private land claims it's
claim for the so-called Beales- -Royuela
land grant in eastern New Mexico:
| THE Interstate Land Company of
| Kansas City, an incorporation that in
cludes in it's membership a number of
well known Kansas and Missouri pol
iticians, is pushing for consideration
before the house committee on private
land claims bill that involves the til
tie to over 20,000,000 acres Of land in
New Mexico. The case has been before
the United States supreme court. where
the claimants were unceremoniously
turned out of court and their claims
declared without a shadow Of founda-
ton. The Interstate Company, how
ever, Is bringing all kinds of pressure
to bear to secure a favorable consider
alton of it's measure. 1t is charged
that the promoters are even threaten
ing to oppose, through their friends in
congress- the admission of New Mexico
statehood, who have been in Washing
ton pressing their bill withdraw oppo-
sitlon to the land grant measure.
"The bill in the Interstate Company's
interest was introduced in the house
some days ago. 1t provides that the
a1,t,. e =, ID II
lying within the territory of New Mex
ico may institute proceedings in the
court of private land claims to estab-
lish their title to the lands. 1t pro-
vides that, in case the title is decided
in the favor of the company. 1t shall not
affect the sales of lands that may have
been made in the grant
When the New Mexico delegation
that was in Washington in the interests
of their statehood bill learned of the
of the Interstate measure,
they promptly started movement in
opposition to it's consideration. They
were met with the threat of the men
here who are working in the interest
of the Interstate Company that the
New Mexico statehood bill would be
opposed If obstacles We're placed in the
way of the Interstate bill The mat.
ter was d.4prea temporarily, but In
terest has been revived by the an
nouncement that the Interstate bill
will be called up soon by the house
committee on private land claims for
cd Ioc Of ha
have requested that they be given an
opportunity to oppose it before the
committee, and an interesting contro-
versy is expected over the measure.
Jose Manuel Royuela and John c.
Beales claim to have title to grant
Of about 2o0Oo,0Oo acres of land in New
Mexico that was made by the Mexican
government in 1882 Their claim Is
based on one of the colonization
schemes Of the government at that
time. Opponents of the grant assert
hat the area, which is now claimed by
he Interstate Land Company, was
simply designated as the limits of a
ract in which the grantee might es-
ablish colony, but that it was never
Intended that the entire tract should
constitute the grant.
"The case was decided, however, in
he supreme court of the United States
n 1891. The Interstate Land Company
It that time sought to prevent the
Iaxwell Land Grant Company from
aking possession Of the Maxwell land
rant in New Mexico and Colorado.
The case was argued and submitted to
he supreme court The decision was
hat the Beales- Royuela grant was ut
erly worthless. The court declared
hat the grant was conditional one in
he first place, and that none Of the
had been complied with;
hat the grantees had not established
he colonies provided for in the original
and that the original grant
lad simply been what was then known
IS an impressario promise, and had
lever had the sanction Of the Mexican
1t was further held that
he treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo be-.
ween the United States and Mexico
pecifically provided that these condi-
iona1 grants should have no standing,
md were worthless.
1.-THE Interstate Company, it is charg-
d, have nominal possession Of a large
ortion Of the lands In question, and
re leasing it to cattlemen. Oppo-
ents of the bill assert that the only
urpose Of the measure is to give the
Interstate Company a shadow Of title,
+ at least an excuse to have the case
led up in the federal courts for term
t years SO that they may in the mean
me continue to profit from the leases
'hich they have made"