times they would grant the same lands to several persons; and there was one instance wherein Gov. Micheltorena ordered that every person in the Northern District of California, who had petitioned for land before a certain date, and whose petition had not been acted upon, should be the owner of the land asked for; provided the nearest Alcalde should certify that it belonged to the public domain. In these cases no title to the grantees was ever made by the Governor.

head of horned cattle upon it. These grants were usually made without any accurate description of the land; there never had been any government survey of any portion of the territory; there were no surveyors in the country to locate the boundaries; neither would the applicants have been willing in most cases to pay for surveys; nor was there any apparent need for them, land being very cheap and quarrels about boundaries very rare. Sometimes the land granted was described with certain fixed natural I have thus briefly mentioned the main boundaries. In other cases, the grant peculiarities of the Mexican system of might be described as lying in a narrow disposing of the public land in California, valley, between two ranges of mountains, as distinguished from the American sysand extending from a tree, rock, or clump tem. The Mexican government made no of willows, up or down the valley far survey of the land; granted it away in enough to include three, six, or ten square immense tracts, without any fixed bounleagues. The most common form of daries, leaving the grantee a wide discregrant was for a certain number of square tion in regard to location, and keeping leagues, lying in a much larger district, no careful registry of the grants. bounded by well known land-marks. When the great immigration of '49 Thus the famous Mariposa grant of Fre-filled the land with Americans, it became mont is for ten square leagues-44,386 acres, equivalent to a tract about nine miles square in the district bounded by the San Joaquin river on the west, the Sierra Nevada mountains on the east, the Merced river on the north, and the Chowchillas on the south; which district includes nearly 100 square leagues. Under such a grant, the Mexican law allowed the grantee to select any place within the larger limits, and make it his home.

The grants made were not carefully registered. The law prescribed that the petitions for land should all be preserved, and a record of them kept, and that a registry should be made of all the lands granted; but the affairs of the Governor's office were loosely conducted; and in many cases where the claimants have been in possession for twenty years, and have an undoubted title, there is nothing in the archives or records of the former government to show for it. In many respects the California governor had been very careless about granting lands. Some

necessary to provide for the recognition and protection of the good Mexican titles by the American Courts. But how was this to be done? By the ordinary State Courts? The judges would not be sufficiently able, and would be ignorant of the laws under which the grants had been made; and the juries would be composed of Americans whose interests would lead them to do injustice to the large land-owners. Besides, the lawmakers and judges elected by a deeply interested populace could not be depended upon to do justice under such circumstances.

Or should the protection be rendered by the appointment of a commission, instructed to make a summary examination of all claims, declare all those valid which had been in possession previous to the conquest, and of which some record might be found in the archives; leaving the other claims to be tried in the U. S. Courts? This was the policy which should should have been pursued.

But that plan was not to prevail. Mr. | whose land system is far more complex Gwin's bill "to ascertain and settle the and strict than our own, and that all our private land claims in the State of Cali- present titles should be declared incomfornia," became a law, on the 30th of plete and insecure, and that every land March, 1851. This act provides for the owner should be taxed to one-fourth of appointment of a special Judicial Com- the value of his land to pay for defending mittee, (to be composed of three judges) his title before a foreign and hostile Court, before which all claimants to land, in the and, if successful, should not get his title State, under Mexican titles, should bring until six or eight years after the comsuit against the Federal Government, mencement of the litigation;—would we within two years after the date of the not exclaim against it as extremely unact, under penalty of forfeiting their just? But what is the difference between land. It provided further, that a law agent that supposed case and the actual one should be appointed, who should "super- under consideration? There is no difintend the interests of the United States ference between the principles involved in in every case." It provided further, that the two cases; each supposes a great appeals might be taken in these land wrong-such a wrong as has been comcases, from the judgments of the Com-mitted by the Federal Government of the mission to the U. S. District Court, and United States upon holders of land in from the latter, to the Supreme Court of California under Mexican grants. the United States. It provided further, that in the trial of these cases, the Commission and the courts should "be governed by the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, the law of nations, the laws, usages and customs of the country from which the claim is derived, the principles of equity, and the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States."

This act provided that the owners of land should sue the Government or lose their land. But why be subjected to so severe a condition? The land owners had committed no offence, that they should be threatened with spoliation. It was not their fault that the Mexican land system differed from the American. The introduction of a new system by the Government did not justify the invalidation of titles, which had been good before, and the subjection of the owners to tedious and expensive litigation. When the American Government took California, it was in honor bound to leave the titles to property as secure as they were at the time of the transfer, and express provision to this effect was made in the treaty. Let us imagine that California were to be again transferred to some other power,

The Land Commission was opened in this city, January 1st, 1852, and in the ensuing fourteen months, 812 suits were brought, and these were all decided previous to the 3d of March, 1855, at which time the Commission dissolved.

It was severe hardship for owners of land under grants from Mexico, that they should be required to sue the government of the United States, (which ought to have protected-not persecuted them,) or lose their land; but this hardship was rendered much more severe by the peculiar circumstances under which the suits had to be tried. The trials were to be had in San Francisco at a time when the expenses of traveling and of living in San Francisco were very great, and the fees of lawyers enormous. The prosecution of the suits required a study of the laws of Mexico, in regard to the disposition of the public lands, and this study had, of course, to be paid for by the clients. In many cases the claimants had to come to San Francisco from remote parts of the State; having three hundred miles to travel, bringing their witnesses with them at their own expense. The witneses were nearly all native Californians, and it was

necessary to employ interpreters at high | clared to be unsettled. The delay was an

prices.

encouragement to dishonest, and often a justification of honest squatters. They wanted to cultivate the ground; they could not learn whether the land they wished to occupy, was public or private property; they knew the question would not be decided soon, and therefore they might know, if dishonest, that they might make a profit by seizing land which they were morally certain would be, and should be,

Meanwhile the claimant could not dispose of his land, on account of the cloud there was on his title: neither could he have it surveyed by the U. S. Surveyor so as to give notice to the public where his land really lay. As he could not give a secure title, nor, in most cases, tell where his boundaries were, the Americans were not disposed to buy the land. Many squatters were, no doubt, glad of a pre-confirmed to the claimant; and if honest, text under which they might take other people's land and use without paying rent; but the circustances were often such that they were justified in refusing to buy. The number of settlers or squatters became large; they formed a decided majority of the the voters in several of the counties; their political influence was great; politicians bowed down before them; all political parties courted them; and most of the U. S. Land Agents, and District Attorneys, appointed under the influence of the California Congressmen, became the representatives of the settler interest, and failed to represent the true interest of the United States. Every device known to the law was resorted to to defeat the claimant, or delay the confirmation of his grant, as though it were the interest of the Federal Government to defeat every claimant, or to postpone his success as long as possible.

Eight hundred and twelve important suits, to be tried according to the principles of strange laws, and on evidence given in a strange tongue, and where the testimony, in many of the cases, covered hundreds of pages of manuscript, were not to be disposed of in any brief period. In fact, the Commission did not clear its docket until more than three years after its organization. This delay, which would have been disastrous in any country, was doubly so in California. During the greater portion of this time, the titles to most of the good farming land in the settled districts of the State, were de

they could not be expected to pay for property, to which, in many cases, the title was one in which they could place no confidence. The consequence of the system was, that a large portion of the most valuable farming land in the State was occupied by squatters. This occupation contributed greatly to injure the value of the property. The land owner could not sell his land, nor use it, and yet he was compelled to pay taxes. His ranch brought serious evils upon him. It was the seat of a multitude of squatters, who—as a necessary consequence of antagonistic pecuniary interest, were his bitter enemies. Cases we know, where they fenced in his best land; laid their claims between his house and his garden; threatened to shoot him if he should trespass on their inclosure; killed his cattle if they broke through the sham fences; cut down his valuable shade and fruit trees, and sold them for fire-wood; made no permanent improvements, and acted generally as tho' they were determined to make all the immediate profit possible, out of the ranch. Such things were not rare: they are familiar to every person who knows the general course of events during the last five years in Sonoma, Napa, Solano, Contra Costa, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz and Monterey Counties. Blood was not unfrequently spilled in consequence of the feuds between the land holders and the squatters; the victims in nearly every case, belonging to the former class.

After the Federal Government had

person worthy of regard, of having rendered dishonest decisions. It would seem that after a second confirmation, the General Government would in common decency permit such claimants as had

committed the error of compelling every Californian land owner to bring suit for his own land, which he had held in indisputable ownership under the Mexican dominion, and even before the independence of Mexico and Spain,—and after the Gov-possession of their lands in 1846, and erment stubbornly contested every case before a tribunal whose learning, ability, and honesty, was and is, universally admitted,—after all this, it is strange that those persons, whose claims were confirmed, and who had been in possession of their land before the American conquest, and in cases where there was no suspition of fraud, were not allowed to take their own property once for all. But no; Uncle Sam told all the Californians who had gained their suits, that they should not take their land till they had sued him again; he would appeal every case; the claimant must make another fight for his property, or be despoiled.

Here, then, was the whole work to be gone over again in the Federal District Courts, of which there are two in the State; and in each district there are about four hundred claims, to be tried by a judge, much of whose time is occupied with the trial of admiralty cases. The land suits must all be defended, or attended to, by the United States District Attorney, much of whose time is occupied with criminal cases, and civil business in which the Federal Government is interested. The result is delay upon delay.

The first case was submitted to Judge Hoffman about July, 1853; and now, after the lapse of nearly five years, there are still about one hundred and twenty cases in both districts undecided. Of all this number, only twenty-two have been rejected; and in almost every case where a decree of confirmation was entered in the Land Commission, the judgment has been affirmed in the District Court. The judges of both District Courts are men and lawyers of fair fame, and, so far as I am informed, are not accused, by any

could show some kind of title from Mexico, to take the land as of perfect title: but no; in every case where the judgment was against the claimant, an appeal was taken to the United States Supreme Court. It is true that not all the cases were forced to trial; the Government, after having had the cases placed on the docket, and having forced the claimants to prepare for trial, dismissed the appeals in some four hundred cases. But two hundred claims are now before the court of last resort, and the one hundred and twenty undecided must also go there, or most of them. The United States Supreme Court has decided about fifteen of the appealed claims within four years, and if they should make the same speed in the future, we may expect that their docket will be cleared of Californian land cases in seventy-five years, or thereabouts. The Government appeals from every decision of the District Court in favor of the claimant, but makes no provision to have the suit brought to a hearing in the Supreme Court. In appealed cases it is the recognized duty of the appealing party to pay for sending up the papers, so that the higher court can take some action in the matter. But the American Government violates this plain rule of right, and law, and custom, and tells the claimant that he must pay this expense out of his own pocket, or wait for an indefinite time before his title can be settled; and no provision is made that he shall be repaid, even when he advances the money.

Such legislation as should make all land titles insecure declare all landed property confiscated, unless the owner should sue the Government and gain the suit, and should appeal to two higher