Albuquerque daily citizen. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1895-1903, 1903-02-28
SUPREME COURT.
In Case Of T. B. CatrOn VS.. Sdron N.
laughIin Decision Reversed.
IMPORTANT OPINIONS REACHED.

Soclate justice McFfC, Associate JUS
tice Parker and Associate Justice Bak-
er present.
The following decisions were handed
down:
In case No. 500. r. b. Catron. ct al,
appellants, VS.. 5. N. Laughlin. ct al,
ap~pellees. appeal from the district court
of Bernalillo county. a decision prepar-
ed by Judge Crumpacker was adopted
as the decision of the court. Judgment
was reversed and the syllabus is as
follows:
The action of congress in confirm
ing a claim for and under a grant made
by Mexico is - be treated as an adju-
dication. and the courts cannot revise
what has been done by congress.
Where the surveyor general of New
Mexico has declared a Mexican land
grant presented to him to be a good
and valid one, and recommended its
confirmation without limitation as to
quantity, and congress has confirmed
the grant as recommended. the con-
firmation is a declaration by congress
that the title is valid for all the land
claimed.
In such a case, while the courts can
not go back 90 the original grant for
the purpose If passing on its validity,
yet they may &c so merely to ascertain
whether it purpcrted to convey abso-
Lutte title to the land, as a means of as
certaining the full scope of the inten-
ton by congress.
In the present case the original grant
by its words of conveyance purports to
give complete title. and it is therefore
held that congress by the confirmation
ad~judicated the title to be perfect.
Where congress has confirmed a
grant to such Of the grantees as had
not forfeited their rights by non-com-
pliance with the conditions of the
grant,, the possible forfeiture indicated
must have taken place prior to the &C
QUESTION of the country from Mexico,
and can be shown only by proof of de
nouncement, and some official action
thereon, under the former government.
and the burden of showing such for
fixture is upon the party alleging it.
There Is no proof in this case to sup
port the findings of the court below
that the appellees had title to the
grant in controversy by adverse pos
session against their c~o-tenants. Judg-
ment is reversed.
In case No. $50, A. G. Green, ct al,
plaintiffs in error, VS.. Browne & Man
zanares Co., defendant in error, error
to district court of Mora county, the
decision of the lower house was affirm
ed in an opinion written by Judge Nc
Fie.
In ease No. 1913, C. T. Brown, receiv-
er, appellee, VS.. Henry Lockhart ct ais,
appellants appeal from district court
of Bernalillo county, was affirmed in
an opinion prepared by Chief Justice
Mills. The syllabus is as follows:
/. Alleged errors which are not jur-
is%dictional will not be considered by
this court on appeal, unless exceptions
to them are made.
2. Findings of the trial as to facts in
issue, will not be set aside, where
llltlt ID tNtlutllIt W SUSTAIN lItli, uh-
less they are manifestly against the
evidence.
3. Where property which is claimed
to be separate property is not preserv-
ed in specie or in kind, but has under
gone mutations and charges in order
to sustain its separate character, it is
necessary that it can be clearly traced
and identified.
4. The law creates a presumption
that property acquired during cover
ture is community property, and is sub
ject to the payment of community
debts, and this presumption casts the
burden of proof upon the claimant of
separate estate. 1t is also a presump-
ton of law that any debt contracted
during the coverture is a community
debt.
Case No. 92i, Ambrosio Armijo ct al,
plaintiff in error, VS.. George X. Neher,
defendant in error, error to district
court Bernalillo county, was decided in
an opinion prepared by Judge Parker.
Judgment was given for the plaintiffs
III III INC Jun Va vopSsfti .
on each monthly receipt of rents and
profits accruing within the four years
prior to the filing of their cross com
plant on January 8, 1899.
Case No. 9S7, margarine Romero, ad-
ministrator, VS.. The Atchison, Topeka
& Santa Fe Railway company, appeal
from district court of San Miguel coun.
ty, was decided in an opinion written
by Judge Merle. , e judgment of the
lower court IN dismissing the com
plant was sustained.
Case No. 992, the Territory of New
Mexico, appellee, VS.. Pablo Padilla, ap-
pellant, appeal from district court Va
lencia county, was decided in an opin-
ion prepared by Chief Justice Mills,
The judgment of the lower court was
affirmed and the syllabus is as fol
lows:
/. The granting or refusing of a mo-
ton for continuance in a criminal case