« ÎnapoiContinuați »
person whom the Government of the United States may see fit to commission to receive the arms of the individuals aforesaid, will also be delivered the horses belonging to them, and which were taken from them at Janos. Be pleased to accept, etc.,
Mr. Bayard to Mr Romero.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
Washington, April 16, 1888. SIR: I have the honor, having regard to my note of December 17, 1887, to apprise you of the receipt of a letter from the Hon. William F. Vilas, Secretary of the Interior, dated the 11th instant, covering a re.. port (a copy of which is inclosed) from the Acting Commissioner of the General Land Office, dated the 15th ultimo, relating to the private land claim in New Mexico of Mr. J. Escobar y Armendariz, known as the Santa Teresa grant.
From this report it will be seen that this grant was acted upon by the surveyor-general of New Mexico, under the provisions of the act of July 22, 1854 (10 Statutes, page 309), and that his recommendation in relation thereto was transmitted to Congress December 11, 1880, where the matter is yet pending, awaiting the action of that body. 6. While tbus pending, it would be,” says Mr. Vilas, “improper for this Department (Interior), if it had the power, to take action in relation to the same by ordering a survey as requested." He also remarks in regard to the report of Surveyor General Julian, complained of, that it was a communi. cation from an official of his Department in relation to the validity and extent of said grant, which it was entirely proper to transmit to Con: gress for its information. Accept, etc.,
T. F. BAYARD.
Mr. Stockslager to Ur. l'ilas.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
IWashington, D. C., March 15, 1888. Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt, by departmental reference, of letter from the Department of State, dated December 17, 1807, covering a copy of a note from the Mexican minister resident, and also the petition of a Mr. J. Escobar y Armendariz, a Mexican citizen, in relation to his title to a private land claim in New Mexico, known as the “Santa Teresa" grant.
These papers are also accompanied by the brief of Hon. J. W. Foster, of this city, bearing upon the title of said J. Escobar y Armendariz to said grant, and you direct this ottice to “report in duplicate and return papers.”
The facts in the case are, generally, as set forth in the copy of petition referred to, as well as in the accompanying brief of Mr. Foster, and may be epitomized as follows (so far as they are authenticated by the transcript and the report of the surveyorgeneral of New Mexico, dated December 11, 1878), viz:
The grant is claimed to have been made to one Francisco Garcia, prior to the year 1790, by the Spanislı authorities of what was then New Biscay, and now the State of Chihuahua.
The original muniments of title are alleged to have been lost or destroyed during
the occupation of El Paso del Norte by the United States troops in 1846. The land elain is situate on the west bank of the Rio Grande del Norte, in the county of Doña Ana, New Mexico, and in that portion thereof embraced by the Gadsden purchase.
By the sixth article of the treaty with Mexico, dated December 30, 1953, and wbich included the Gadsden purchase, it was provided that
** No grants of land within the territory ceded by the first article of this treaty bearing date subsequent to the day-25th of September—when the minister and subscriber to this treaty on the part of the United States proposed to the Goverument of Mexico to terminate thú question of bouudary will be considered valid or be recognized by the United States, or will any grants made previously be respected or be considered as obligatory which have not been located and duly recorded in the archives of Mexico."
Nearly nine months prior to this limitation in the treaty the grant claimants made application to the judicial authorities at El Paso del Norte for perpetuation of title. The application and proof snbmitted seem to have been in accordance with the laws and customs of the State of Chihuahua, in whose jurisdiction the claim in question was situate.
In pursuance of this application and upon the evidence of several witnesses showing the previous existence of the grant to the tract claimed, the loss of the title papers during the American occupation of El Paso del Norte in 1846, and the occupancy of the land by the grantee and his heirs from time inmemorial, the second civil justice of the cantonuent of Bravos, Bentura Lopez, rendered a decree declaring the property to belong to José Maria Garcia and his co-heirs under and by virtue of the grant to Francisco Garcia, their father.
It also appears that this sanie jurisdiction, on the 16th of January, 1853, went in person upon the claim, and in the presence of wituesses as to the old boundaries and monuments proceeded to relocate the grant and place claimants in possession by certain legal formalities.
The transcript of these proceedings was presented to the surveyor-general as the basis of the claim. It was duly authenticated as required by the laws of the United States relative to documents offered in evidence in the United States courts from foreign conntries; and other corroborative evidence of the genuineness of the grant being on file in his oftice, he proceeded to rule as follows:
“ The evidence of occupation of the tract by Francisco Garcia, and after his death by liis widow and beirs for a continuous period from prior to, or about, the year 1790 until recently, raises a strong presumption in favor of the validity of the grant, independeut of the documentary evidence referred to, and it is believed to be a good and valid grant. The claim is therefore approved to the heirs and legal representatives of Francisco Garcia and their assignees, according to the boundaries as berein set forth, and as described in the resurvey or act of possession of January 16, 1853, executed at El Paso del Norte by Bentura Lopez, second justice and of first instance of the cantonment of Bravos."
The papers, in duplicate, were forwarded to your Department for transmission to Congress on the 7th of Doceniber, 1880, and, as will appear from your records, were transmitted to Congress December 11, 1880, where the case is still pending, awaiting the action provided for in eighth section of the act of July 22, 1854, U. S. Statutes, v. 10, p. 309.
It appears from the records of this office that on the 3d of December, 1885, Hon. George W. Julian, then and at present United States surveyor-general of New Mexico, addressed a personal note to Hon. William A. J. Sparks, former Commissioner, desiring to know wbat policy he should pursue in respect to the examination of private land claims which had been reported by his predecessors. On the 11th of December, 1885, Mr. Sparks replied:
“In my annual report I have recommended that all claims heretofore transmitted to Congress pro forma, through this ottice, be remanded for re-examination. Should any cases reported upon by your predecessors be brought to your attention, in which it appears that an investigation is desirable in the public interest, I kuow of no objection to your making such investigation, but, on the contrary, think it ought to be made for the information of this office and Congress.
** Any supplemental reports sent up by you will be transmitted to Congress for consideration.”
Accordingly on the 16th of October, 1886, Surveyor-General Julian made a supplemental report ou tbe grant under consideration, and after stating the facts substantially as already submitted, and quoting the sixth article of the Gadsden treaty of De. cember 30, 1853, supra, reported as follows:
** According to this langnage, as I understand it, no grant of land comprised within the territory covered by this treaty can be recognized by the United States as valid, whether the date of the grant be prior or subsequent to the timo specitied, unless the grant shall have been dwy recorded in the archives of Mexico. As there is no proof ibat this was done I can not recommend the approval of this claim by Congress, nor could I do so if the grant had been produced and shown to be genuine, because the record of it in the archives of Mexico is made an indispensable condition of title. Neither can I recommend the recognition of an equitablo claim. In my opinion, it could not be founded on a grant which is made uvalid by a treaty between the United States and Mexico. Congress is precluded by this treaty from respecting the grant or considering it obligatory, and the equity wbich the case would otherwise bave presented is lost."
This report was forwarded to the Department, with the concurrence of Commissioner Sparks, for submission to Congress, on the 4th of May, 1887.
It appears that the petitioner is a claimant of the aforesaid grant by purchase from the legal representatives of the original grantee, and he prays you for a report to the following effect, in brief:
First. That the documentary evidence on file in the surveyor-general's office, and before Congress, shows a good and valid title under the laws, usages, and customs of Mexico, etc.
Second. That Congressional action be expedited looking to the final confirmation of the grant.
Third. That a resurvey of the grant be made, corrective of the survey thereof now before Congress.
As regards the first prayer, I deem it sufficient to say in addition to the foregoing statements that, in my judgment, no further expression of opinion on the part of the Executive is called for in advance of any indication by Congress of a desire therefor. As regards tho second, that what it is proper for Congress to do, and when to do it, is a matter for itself to determine, and I see nothing remaining to be done by which the Department can expedite the action of Congress.
As to the third, it might be proper to state that the survey of the grant now before Congress is merely a preliminary one; and if Congress should contirm the grant by the boundaries set forth in the documentary evidence on file in the case, the survey must be made to conform thereto. In other words, the survey must correspond with the terms of the contirmatory act, whatever they may be, should Congress see proper to confirm the grant.
Moreover, there is no appropriation at this time for the survey of unconfirmed private land claims in New Mexico. The papers referred are herewith returned. Very respectfully, etc.,
S. M. STOCKSLAGER,
Mr. Romero to Mr. Bayard.
LEGATION OF MEXICO, Washington, April 28, 1888. (Received April 30.) Mr. SECRETARY: I have the honor to inform you that I submitted to the Government of Mexico your note of the 24th ultimo relative to the passing of cattle across our frontier from one country to the territory of the other and that I bave now been authorized, with a view to the avoidance of the difficulties which have hitherto arisen in connection therewith, to submit to the United States Government a draught of an arrangement with respect to the crossing of cattle, which is designed to prevent the occurrence of the principal difficulties connected with the matter in question.
I have consequently prepared the inclosed draught, which is based upon the views expressed in my notes to your Department on this subject, bearing date of March 20, 1886, and March 25, 1887, wherein you will find an explanation of several of its stipulations.
If you think proper to make any additions to, or modifications in the inclosed draught, I will thank you to communicate to me your views with regard to it, so that if they are acceptable to the Government of Mexico we may reach an understanding on this subject. Be pleased to accept, etc.,
Draught of an arrangement. The United States of Mexico and the United States of America desiring to put an end to the ditficulties which have arisen in connection with the crossing of cattle from one to the other side of the boundary line between the two countries, and with the provisions of their revenue laws, have agreed upon the following articles:
The importation, properly so called, of cattle across the frontier from one country to the other, for the purposes of trade, shall be subject to the laws and regulations now in force, or that may hereafter be adopted by either country on this subject, and it sball consequently take place via such points as either country may have declared open to foreign commerce.
The importation of cattle is authorized from one country into the territory of the other, across the frontier, for purposes of trade, ria points that have not been declared open to the import trade, and where, consequently, other kinds of merchandise can not now be imported, provided, however, that the owner of the cattle give notice, eight days beforehand, to the custom-house nearest to the place where the cattle are to cross, in the country in which the importation is to take place, for the information of said custom-house and in order that tbe cattle may be entered thore.
ARTICLE III. The crossing of cattle is likewise authorized, at any point on the frontier, from one country to the territory of the other, for the purpose of grazing, on the following conditions:
(1) The owner of the cattle shall give notice, eight days beforehand, to the proper custom-house of the country to which they are going to graze, of the number of head of cattle that he intends to drive across, together with their marks and other things that may serve to identify them, and of the time during which they are to graze.
(2) Before the expiration of the time stated in the application for a permit the owner of the cattle shall again address the collector of customs, eight days beforehand, notifying him of the date when he intenıls to have the cattle driven back to the country whence they came.
(3) The time during which the cattle of one country may graze in the territory of tbe other shall not exceed six months. If at the expiration of that time the cattle do not return and the requirements of the above conditions are not fulfilled they shall be considered as baving been imported for commercial purposes and shall, consequently, be liable to the payment of the regular duties.
When cattle of one country cross to the territory of the other of their own accord, or without the knowledge of their owner, either in search of pasturo or as estrays, they shall pay no import duty, provided that the following requirements be fultilled:
(i) That as soon as the owner of the cattle has knowledge of the fact ho repair to the nearest custom-house of the country to whose territory they have crossed and make a declaration of what has taken place.
(2) That he prove his ownership of the said cattle by the marks which they bear, and by such other signs as may serve to identify them.
(3) That no evidence be presented which, in the opinion of the collector of customs, invalidates the aforesaid claim of ownership.
(4) That not more than days have passed since the date of the crossing of the cattle until the date of the presentation to the collector of custo by the interested party, of the application for return).
(5) When the return of the cattle shall have been ordered by the collector of customs, such return shall take place without payment of any duties whatever.
ARTICLE V. When cattle belonging in one country bave been stolen and driven by the thieves to the territory of the other, and subsequently recovered by the proper authorities, they shall be held for return to their lawful owner when he shall appear, in which case no duties shall be payable, and no charges save for the keep of tue cattle,
H, Ex, 1, pt. 1----8;
When more than one person shall claim to be the owners of cattle driven across the frontier by thieves, or when the collector of customs shall bave reason to doubt whether the person who claims them is the lawful owner, a certificate from a competent magistrate in the place of residence of such claimant shall be considered as evidence of the ownership of the cattle.
Mr. Bayard to Mr. Romero.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
Washington, May 18, 1888. Sir: In reply to your note of the 28th ultimo, which has had the consideration due to the importance of your propositions, I have now to acquaint you of the result of the preliminary examinations, in con junction with the Departmer.t of the Treasury, of the draught arrangement you submitted intended to regulate the reciprocal passage of cattle on the border between the United States and Mexico.
The draught you submit to me substantially enlarges the scope of the measures now pending before Congress with regard to cattle straying from the United States into Mexico and thence returned; but upon examination of its several features, my colleague, the Secretary of the Treasury, perceives no particular objection to any of the articles thereof, excepting, perhaps, Article III, which provides for the temporary im. portation, free of duty, of cattle from either country into the territory of the other for the purpose of grazing during a permitted period, and perhaps, also, the sixth article, as hereinafter indicated.
As to Article III, it is suggested, as a measure for the better protection of the customs revenues, and therefore one equally commending itself to both parties, that due entry of the cattle so brought into the respective country, for grazing purposes, shall be made at the custom. house nearest to the point of crossing, the cattle to be at the same time examined and appraised by the customs oflicers, and a bond, with sufficient sureties, to be taken from the owner, for the exportation of the animals within six months from the date of the importation or the pay. ment of duties thereon.
As to Article VI, which relates to cattle that may be stolen or driven across the frontier by thieves, and which prescribes that" a certificate from a competent magistrate in the place of residence of such claimant shall be considered as evidence of the ownership of the cattle, when there are conflicting claims of ownership," it is suggested that it might be amended by prescribing that such certificate shall be required in addition to other satisfactory proofs of the identity of the animals and their ownership.
The Secretary of the Treasury is further pleased to comment upon the legislative measures now pending in the Congress of the United States, to which your previous notes on this subject have related, and ob serves that the information he possesses being to the effect that the Republic of Mexico intends to pass a similar law authorizing the return to that country, under like exemptions, of cattle straying thence into the United States, lie is of the opinion that the provisions of the Senate and House bills are reasonable and proper, and that owners of animals