l. When, in Mexican grants, boundaries are given and a
limitation upon the quantity embraced within the boundaries is
intended, words expressing such intention are generally used. In
their absence, the extent of the grant is only subject to the
limitation upon the power of the governor imposed by the
colonization law of 1824.
2. Where a doubt arises upon the meaning of the grant as to the
quantity ceded, reference may be had to the juridical possession
delivered to the grantee. This proceeding involved an ascertainment
and settlement of the boundaries of the land granted, by the
appropriate officers of the government,
Page 72 U. S. 537
specially designated for that purpose, and had all the force and
efficacy of a judicial determination. It bound the former
government, and is equally binding upon the officers of our
government.
3. A pueblo or town of Mexico, once formed and officially
recognized, became entitled, under the laws of that country, to the
use of certain lands, for its benefit and the benefit of its
inhabitants, and the lands were upon petition set apart and
assigned to it by the government. No other evidence of title than
such assignment was required, nor was any other given. The
disposition of the lands assigned was subject at all times to the
control of the government of the country.
This was a proceeding for the confirmation of a claim to lands
in California acquired under the Mexican government. The claim was
for two tracts, one of which was designated as the Rancho of San
Margarita and San Onofre, and the other as the Rancho of Las
Flores.
The Rancho of San Margarita and San Onofre was acquired under a
grant made in May, 1841. It describes the land as
"bordering to the north on the point called El Ballicito and La
Tenega, to the west on the point of San Mateo, to the south on the
boundaries of the Pueblo de las Flores and El Moro, and to the east
on the land of the Cajon, according to what is shown is the sketch
annexed to the expediente,"
and the testimony in the case showed that these boundaries were
well known in the country and easily traced. In 1842, juridical
possession was given to the grantees when the land was measured and
its boundaries established, and ever since it has been occupied,
cultivated, and improved by the grantees or parties claiming under
them. In 1845, the concession was approved by the departmental
assembly. The resolution of approval, after reciting the
concession, and that it was made in conformity with the
requirements of the laws, is as follows:
"It approves of the concession made by the superior government
of the department in favor of the native-born Mexican citizens, Pio
Pico and Anders Pico, of the locations known by the names of San
Onofre and Santa Margarita, in extent twelve square leagues (sitios
ganada mayor), in entire conformity with the law of the 18th of
August, 1824, and article fifth of the regulations of 21st of
November, 1828. "
Page 72 U. S. 538
The tract known as the Rancho of Las Flores was acquired by
purchase from an Indian pueblo or town of that name. The record
showed the existence of the pueblo and the assignment to it of the
land in question by the officers of the Mexican government, and
that subsequently the was transferred to the Picos, under the
supervision and with the sanction of the local authorities.
The district court confirmed the claim to both ranches, stating
in the decree that the tract confirmed contained twenty square
leagues, and giving its boundaries specifically. From this decree
the United States appealed.
MR. JUSTICE FIELD delivered the opinion of the Court.
By the decree of the district court which is the subject of
appeal in this case, the respondents obtained a confirmation of
their claim to two tracts of land, containing together an area of
twenty square leagues.
One of the tracts is designated as the Rancho of San Margarita
and San Onofre, and is described in the concession of the governor
by specific boundaries. The testimony shows that these boundaries
were at the time well known in the country and easily traced. The
concession was made in May, 1841, and within the year following,
juridical possession of the land was given to the grantees, and
from that time until the present day it has been occupied,
cultivated, and improved by them or parties claiming under
them.
In July, 1845, the concession was approved by the departmental
assembly. The resolution of approval, after designating the tract
ceded, adds, "in extent twelve square leagues," and these words are
supposed by the appellants to create a limitation upon the quantity
granted.
It is evident, however, that the words are not used for any such
purpose, but merely indicate a conjectural estimate of the
quantity. The concession of the governor, with its specific
description, is referred to in the proceedings of the assembly,
Page 72 U. S. 539
and is stated to have been made in conformity with the
requirements of the law. No objection is suggested to the
boundaries given, nor is an intimation made of any intention to
exclude from the concession any portion of the land they embrace or
to restrict the concession in any particular.
When, in Mexican grants, boundaries are given and a limitation
upon the quantity embraced within the boundaries is intended, words
expressing such intention are generally used. Thus, in the
Fremont case, the boundaries stated embraced many leagues
more than the quantity intended to be granted, and the grant
provided for the measurement of the designated quantity and the
reservation of the surplus. In the absence of terms of similar
import, the extent of the grant is only subject to the limitation
upon the power of the governor, imposed by the colonization law of
1824. [
Footnote 1]
Were there any doubt of the intention of the governor to cede
all the land contained within the boundaries designated by him, it
would be removed by the juridical possession delivered to the
grantees. This proceeding involved an ascertainment and settlement
of the boundaries of the lands granted by the appropriate officers
of the government, specially designated for that purpose, and has
all the force and efficacy of a judicial determination. It bound
the former government, and is equally binding upon the officers of
our government.
Such is the purport of the recent decision in the case of
Graham v. United States. [
Footnote 2] In that case the survey made by the Surveyor
General of the grant confirmed did not conform to the measurement
of the land as shown by the record of juridical possession, and the
district court, for that reason, set the survey aside and ordered a
new survey, which should correspond with the measurement, holding
that the action of the officers of the former government, upon the
delivery of possession, furnished insuperable objections to
Page 72 U. S. 540
any other course. In affirming this decision, this Court
expressed its concurrence with the views of the district court, and
held that a proceeding of that character must control the officers
of the United States in the survey of land claimed under a
confirmed Mexican grant. In other words, the case decided that the
juridical possession was conclusive as to the boundaries and extent
of the land granted.
The other tract included in the confirmation is designated as
the Rancho of Las Flores, and was acquired by the claimants by
purchase from the Indians of the pueblo of that name. The existence
of the pueblo and the assignment to it of the land in question by
the officers of the Mexican government are fully established by the
documentary evidence in the case. The objection of the appellants
is founded upon the absence of any transfer of the title to the
pueblo by deed or other writing. But such transfer was not
essential, nor was it usual. A pueblo once formed and officially
recognized became entitled, under the laws of Mexico, to the use of
certain lands, for its benefit and the benefit of its inhabitants,
and the lands were, upon petition, set apart and assigned to it by
the government. No other evidence of title than such assignment was
required, nor was any other given. [
Footnote 3]
The disposition of the lands assigned was subject at all times
to the control of the government of the country. The pueblo of Las
Flores was an Indian pueblo, and over the inhabitants the
government extended a special guardianship. The transfer of the
land to the Picos was made in conformity with the existing
regulations established for the protection of the Indians, under
the supervision and with the approval of the local authorities, and
appears to have been satisfactory to all parties.
The decree of the district court must be affirmed, and it is
So ordered.
[
Footnote 1]
United States v.
D'Aguirre, 1 Wall. 316.
[
Footnote 2]
71 U. S. 4
Wall. 260.
[
Footnote 3]
Hart v. Burnett, 15 Cal. 542, 561.
