Democratic Sentinel, Volume 11, Number 23, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 8 July 1887 — LAND STEALING IN NEW MEXICO. [ARTICLE]

LAND STEALING IN NEW MEXICO.

Indianapolis Sentinel: In th© July number of the North American Review an articls appears from the pen of Hon. George W. Julian upon the subject of “Land Stealing in New Mexico.” Mr. Julian, as our readers are aware, holds the responsible office of SurveyorGeneral of New Mexico, a position for which he is pre-eminently qualified in every respect, having as far back as the Thirty-first Congress delivered a speech “on the public lands, embodying the leading features of the policy on that subject, which has since received the indorsement of all parties.”— We montion the fact to show that Mr, Julian has made the subject of public. lands a special study, and that he was regarded in Congress so thoroughly equipped to champion the right in all matters pertaining to the public domain that in the Thirty-ninth Congress he was authorized by t.*e Committee on Public Lands to introduce a bill which proposed to make the homestead law what it should have been from the beginning. It may be doubted if, in the entire country, a man better prepared to investigate “land stealing in New Mexico”

ould have been found. A lawyer, a statesman, and a student, a man of unswerving integrity, of earnest convictions and with courage equal to convictions, an implacable hater of thieves and rogues of all grades, it was generally understood that Mr. Julian would do his best to nrke land stealing odious and expose the rascals who wore engaged in the business, and the article in the North American Review before us is conclusive that neither Mr. Cleveland nor the public had over.-'stimented Mr. Julian’s integritv, ability or fearlessness. Mr. Julian’s exposure of “land stealing in New Mexico” is a serie- of revelations well calculated to startle the country. The land thieves have played their game with consummate adroitness. As an illustration of this, the land sharks from the first “sought the good will of the Surveyors-general, because they desired an opinion’ favorable to their titles. In furtherance of ihis «- aiding purpose, they took note of his small salary and his natural love of thrift, while carefully taking his measure with the view of enlisting him in their service by eontrollug motives.” Mr Julian’s paper relates to Spanish and Mexican Dnd grants, and as he cites instances of the expans; n of these grants, to satisfy the gre d of el dm ants, astonishment increases until the mind be-

comes bewildered as it contemplates the stupenci >us scoundrel ism that|has been p acticed in New Mexico. Numerous instances are cited as illustrations. Tire Perdernales grant was for a narrow strip of land abou 1 a mile in length —this exparded to twenty miles square, or 400 square miles, containing 256,000 acres. lhe C nada Ancha tract was originally for “a spot of land on which to plant a corn field” —this expanded tot 375 square miles, or 240,000 acres. The grafit known as the anon de Cham a tract was for 184,000

acres, and this expanded to 472,000 acres. A grant to Antonio Sandoval is said to b putely fictitious., but was approved} for 648 squaie miles, or ! 416,036 acres. The Socorro grant is specially referred to as a stupendous fraud. A small tract of land may be claimed with some plausibility, but the claim as made covers 1,612,000 acres, and as surveyed contains 843 259 acres. ' he grant to Bernardo Micra Y Pacheco and Pedro Padilla was one league of land, 4,438 acres. — This h s expanded t - 148,862 acres. The Canada do Cochiti grant was for ab ut thirty-two acres. This has swelled to 163 square miles, or 104,544 acres. There is much more of this sort of land stealing in New Mexico, as shown by Mr. Julian, who says “these illustrations of legalized spoliation and robbery could be multiplied ” It seems impossitle that such stupendous robberies could be practiced, but the record as given by Mr. Julian plac s the facts beyond controversy. But when Mr. Julian passes to the consideration of cases in which Congress has taken action, and which are still pending, an amount of villainy appears in which nothing but recorded figures could force credence. One grant is referred to which could not have been for more than 48,000 acres, and yet it was swelled to 93 " square miles, or 596,515 acres; and another grant is referred to for 827,621 acres, without any conclusive proofs of right to the land. Mr. Julian states that under the administrations of Grant and Hayes not less than acres were orim'nally surrendered to monopolists which should have been reserved for the landless poor. Mr. Julian refers to the vast estate claimed by 8. W. Dorsey, the Republican star route thief, and conspicuous land thief, and refers to the schemes resorted to obtain land by processes w ich should send him and his confederates to the peniten iary. Mr. Julian inclosing his paper says “distinguished Senators and Representatives from some of the great laud States of the West are well understood to be in sympathy with S. W. Dorsey, S. B. Elki. s and their confederates, and nothing but the dread of antagonizing the President for his fight against land thieves restrains them in acting openl .” But we are inclined to the opinion that when Mr. Julian’s statements are read and discussed, as they will be, “distinguished Senators and Representatives’ will be a little careful in making themselves conspicuous as defenders of land stealing in New Mexico or elsewhere.