Cañada de Cochiti Land Grant (Part 2 of 4)

Land Transactions After 1800 and Initial Efforts to Formalize the Land Claim

Over the years, some of the descendants of José Antonio Lucero de Godoy and Francisca Varela Jaramillo sold their shares of the land grant to other families while others continued to pass them down to their children and grandchildren. Although it is difficult to trace precisely how the land changed hands during the 19th century, the Cañada de Cochiti land grant case file contains all the known land transactions that occurred prior to 1884. The heirs of Lucero de Godoy formed a commission to seek formal recognition of their claims to the grant. They entrusted two representatives, Felipe Sandoval (F1b3(1)) and Román Baca[i] with registering their claim on their behalf with the US Government. On April 1, 1867, the two men delivered the original grant papers, wrapped in a handkerchief, to the US Surveyor General in Santa Fe.

The sheer volume of land grant cases before the surveyor general and the allegations of fraud that briefly halted Congressional confirmation of grants in the early 1870s likely delayed any action on the petition. During the interlude, Anglo-American businessmen Joel Parker Whitney arrived on the scene and began to buy up land in the area. He had migrated to California from New England during the Gold Rush and settled in Rocklin, near Sacramento. He had first visited New Mexico during the building of the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe railroad, remarking that it was a time “when the conditions of the Territory were much unsettled, and when no other section of the country could have equaled it in lawlessness and rough life.”[ii] Nevertheless, he must have seen New Mexico’s business potential for he continued to purchase other land in the area in pursuit of mining and ranching interests. From 1881 to 1883, he and his brother James G. Whitney purchased the bulk of the Cañada de Cochiti land grant through 65 different land sale transactions.

Although most of the transactions do not indicate the amount of land purchased, James G. Whitney paid a total of $9,351 for portions of the Cañada de Cochiti land grant while his brother paid $31,070. Most of the transactions involved heirs of Miguel Lucero (F) ($22,096), Ignacio Lucero (D) ($4,060) and Martín Lucero (E) ($3,730). Transactions totaling $3,429 involved individuals that were of no known descent from the Lucero-Varela Jaramillo family. Most of the transactions follow a standard format, although there is one that raises some questions about its legitimacy. On July 20, 1882, Vicente Salas (E2a3b), resident of Trinidad, Las Animas County, Colorado claimed that he was the authorized representative of the other six members of his extended family to engage in the sale of the land to James G. Whitney. However, two of the family members named were already deceased. Church records show that José Seferino Salas (E2a3a) had been buried at Cochiti Pueblo on July 12, 1869, and María Clara Salas (E2a3e) had died before November 1880. Perhaps they had died intestate and it was legally expeditious to feign they were still living to move forward with the sale.

With the Whitneys now shepherding the legal process, the claimants filed a legal petition for the Cañada de Cochiti land grant with the US Surveyor General’s Office in Santa Fe on July 22, 1882. The petitioners stated that since the grant had never been surveyed, they were unable to state the quantity of land claimed and what conflicts, if any, existed between the boundaries of the grant and other grants of land made by Spain or Mexico. However, believing that there were no valid conflicting claims, they requested approval of the grant and its transmission to Congress for confirmation. Henry Atkinson, the surveyor general at the time, subpoenaed witnesses who could authenticate the documents and the legitimacy of the claimants’ rights to the property.

During Mr. Atkinson’s investigation, the Land Commissioner for New Mexico, Amado Chávez, alleged that the boundaries presented were incorrect, belying the claims of the Cañada de Cochiti petitioners. In a written statement dated November 25, 1882, Amado Chávez stated, “I do not know whether the grant is genuine or not, but I do know that they are trying to perpetuate a fraud upon the government, as well as upon many people of this Territory by trying to prove that one of the boundaries of said grant—La Sierra de Jemez—the west boundary, is far beyond from where it really is.” He went on to state that if approved as claimed, other grants would therefore be “destroyed” by virtue of its priority as an older grant. Mr. Chávez’s testimony was not entirely altruistic, as he was a claimant to the Cañon de San Diego grant, which conflicted with the Cañada de Cochiti grant.

Based on all the evidence, Mr. Atkinson approved the grant on August 25, 1883. However, he granted approval only for the amount of land in actual and bona fide possession of the heirs of Lucero de Godoy, not for the entire tract as described by the boundaries in the 1728 document. The New Mexican Review lauded the decision, declaring under the headline “Fraud Frustrated”:

The decision is clear and logical and full of sound law, and the result of Survey General Atkinson’s investigation and the opinion he has so positively expressed is sure to be approved by Congress. No doubt the grantees will receive their just rights which will probably amount to about ten thousand acres instead of nearly seven hundred thousand as was originally claimed. In the results which will follow this decision the interests of the government and the people will both be duly protected. In short, the declaration is just and equitable to all the parties interested.[iii]

On May 7, 1884, James G. Whitney and Octavia S. Whitney sold three land grants: their share of the Cañada de Cochiti, Baca Location No. 1 and Ojo de Borrego to Joel Parker Whitney for $17,000. James Whitney had just been acquitted of the murder of Manuel B. Otero the week before this transaction. Even so, many locals were indignant at the verdict and it was likely these lingering hostilities prompted James to exit the land speculation business.

When it came time to survey the grant, Clarence Pullen, Atkinson’s successor, wrote to the US Department of the Interior’s General Land Office on February 28, 1885, seeking instructions. Mr. Pullen had already directed his deputy surveyors to survey the grant in accordance with the original boundaries described in the 1728 grant papers but had written to ask for guidance whether to proceed or to have it surveyed only in the amount actually occupied and held by the Lucero heirs. In reply, the Acting Commissioner Mr. Harrison stated that his instructions were “proper and correct under the circumstances of the case,” and that because the Lucero heirs’ claim pre-dated the claims of others, the survey of the entire tract should proceed, leaving final disposition of title to Congress. After Mr. Pullen sent the survey of the entire tract to the General Land Office, various other parties filed protests, including claimants to other land grants that overlapped with Cañada de Cochiti.

The task then fell to the next surveyor general, George W. Julian, to review the claim when he began his duties on July 22, 1885. Mr. Julian forwarded the protest petitions and rebuttals from Whitney and his lawyers to the General Land Office in August 1885. The case was already pending before Congress, but the commissioner, in a letter dated January 12, 1886, directed Mr. Julian to re-examine the case and file a report for the information of his office and Congress.

On February 27, 1886, Mr. Julian issued his opinion on the grant. With respect to the survey, he criticized Acting Commissioner Harrison’s instructions, observing that he had no right to order the survey or make any statements regarding the priority of the Lucero heirs’ claims over others. More importantly, he raised doubts regarding the documents underpinning the entire case. He questioned the authenticity of the original grant documents, as the papers presented were copies of the original, which had been “allegedly” authenticated by Juan Antonio Cabeza de Baca, alcalde of the jurisdiction in 1817 and the 1785 petition had not been authenticated in any manner whatsoever. He also claimed that there was no law empowering any alcalde to authenticate documents.

Furthermore, it appeared “preposterous” that the original grantee, having asked for enough land to cultivate ten fanegas of wheat and two of corn, and to pasture his livestock, would be granted 104,544 acres of land as claimed. He also argued that Spanish law did not allow for the granting of such large tracts of land for pasturage, other than for usufruct use (i.e. use or tenancy of the land, not outright private ownership). This assertion was bolstered by the fact that subsequent land grants had been made in the area that made no mention of any conflict with the Cañada de Cochiti grant. Mr. Julian concluded that since the right of possession of the land by the descendants of Lucero was supported only by questionable oral testimony, “where witnesses ignorant of the sanctity of an oath, or reckless of its obligation, can readily be found,” his recommendation to Congress was to reject the claim in its entirety and restore it to the public domain.[iv] Notwithstanding Mr. Julian’s disparaging comments about the honor and veracity of potential witnesses, his reasoning as to the size of the grant appears sound.

Continued in Part 3. Subscribe to the blog to receive email updates.

Note: the source of the information regarding the history of the grant can be found in the New Mexico State Archives, Land Grant Case Files, Court of Private Land Claims Case No. 205 and 240 and Survey General Report No. 135.

[i] Román A. Baca, stated in testimony before the CPLC in September 1894 that his wife was a great-granddaughter of José Antonio Lucero. However, based on genealogical records, his wife Ramona Labadie was a great-great-granddaughter of José Antonio Lucero’s younger brother Diego.

[ii] Ken Morrow, “Joel Parker Whitney: The Richest Man in Placer County,” January 2013, p. 15. Available at: https://rocklinhistorical.org/written_history/Joel%20Parker%20Whitney%20(Jan-2013).pdf

[iii] The New Mexican Review, September 27, 1883, p. 2

[iv] Letter from the Acting Secretary of the Interior to the US Senate Committee on Private Land Claims, Executive Document No. 128, April 21, 1886. Accessed at govinfo.gov on April 7, 2024: https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/SERIALSET-02340_00_00-030-0128-0000