Cañada de Cochiti Land Grant (Part 4 of 4)

The boundaries and size of the land grant were perhaps the most contentious and difficult matters for the court to address. The crux of the ambiguity was the location of the Pueblo Viejo de Cochiti, as there were several sites with pueblo ruins across the area. There were two potential sites that had been included on a map of the region that had been surveyed in 1885 by William Harris,[i] a 33-year-old mining engineer and resident of Allerton. The plaintiff’s attorneys called Mr. Harris as a witness to establish the accuracy of the map and the location of the Old Pueblo of Cochiti. He stated that he had been accompanied on the survey by Zenon Sandoval (F1b3a), José Antonio Sandoval (husband of F1c(2)4), Francisco Sandoval (F1c(2)4b) and Miguel Lucero (unknown). Mr. Harris then identified the locations of two old Pueblos of Cochiti, one marked “Pueblo Viejo of Cochiti,” which fell between the Cañon del Alamo and the Cañon Capulin, near an area known as the Potrero de las Vacas, and one marked “Ruined Pueblo,” six to eight miles further south, situated southwest of the Cañon de Cochiti. According to historical accounts, after Governor Diego de Vargas’s reconquest of New Mexico, the Cochiti Indians had retreated to the Pueblo Viejo—the location of which was subject to some debate throughout the proceedings.

Several witnesses indicated that the northern site was the one that was the northern boundary of the grant and was known as the Pueblo Viejo, including Felipe Sandoval (F1b3(1)), Manuel Hurtado (E2c1), Roman A. Baca, and José Sandoval (husband of F1c(2)4). When Zenon Sandoval (F1b3a),[ii] a 42-year-old farmer and resident of the Cañada de Cochiti testified regarding the location of the Pueblo Viejo, he was questioned about the conflict between the Spaniards and Cochiti natives after the Vargas reconquest:

Attorney: Did the old people tell you about the time when the Cochiti Indians fought with the Spaniards?

Mr. Sandoval: Well, I heard some talks about these Indians, among the old people.

Attorney: But you have not any certain memory on the subject, have you?

Mr. Sandoval: Well, all that I could remember is that those Indians was [sic] conquered the last time at the Potrero de las Casas, that was the last pueblo they made.

Attorney: What did they say about it?

Mr. Sandoval: They said that those Indians had a pueblo there and were driven from there, and they made another pueblo at Potrero Cañon de Casas and from there was come the last time to the present pueblo who are there now.

Attorney: Did they tell you how this pueblo at Las Casas was taken by the Spaniards—did they tell you anything of the circumstances of the capture?

Mr. Sandoval: Yes, sir, I remember what they said.

Attorney: What did they say?

Mr. Sandoval: They said that the soldiers went there at the cañon in some place and sent the horses over to the present pueblo of Cochiti to an open place; in time they were ordered to drive the horses past it; at night time the soldiers went near the Cañon de Pino where Allerton is now, and they went on these trails west to the pueblo and made a fire and drove the Indians out.

Although the details of the account are somewhat vague, it is astonishing that an oral history recounting this event had survived for 200 years. On cross-examination, the defense attorney attempted to establish that the southern site was called the Potrero de las Casas interchangeably with Potrero Viejo, but Mr. Sandoval stated he had never heard it called as such. Pablo Lucero (F1d1) also agreed that the northern boundary of the land grant was the Pueblo Viejo of Cochiti, located on the Potrero de las Vacas. He said that after the Cochiti Indians were conquered, they were taken down to the present location of the Cochiti Pueblo and left under the care of a priest, who they attempted to kill before returning to the Pueblo Viejo.

One witness, John Dixon,[iii] a 33-year-old carpenter and Indian native of Cochiti Pueblo, helped the defense’s cases by providing some doubt about the location of the Pueblo Viejo. When he was questioned by the plaintiffs’ attorney, he indicated that the northern pueblo was the location of the Pueblo Viejo. However, under cross-examination by the defense attorney, he admitted that the southern pueblo ruins had also been called the Pueblo Viejo de Cochiti or simply Pueblo de Cochiti.

The plaintiffs next called expert witnesses who did not have any direct interest in the land grant in an attempt to show that the area under cultivation had historically extended north of the “Ruined Pueblo” and therefore the Pueblo Viejo must be the northern boundary of the grant. Flave Simonson, a 53-year-old mechanical engineer and lumberman from Milwaukee, Wisconsin, described the conditions of the land and evidence of its occupation and cultivation. He observed that he had seen signs that the earth had been dug up in rows for the planting of corn and that acequias had been built alongside them. He had also seen the remnants of what looked like foundations of homes. L. A. Hughes, a resident of Santa Fe and agent of the government who had visited the Cañada de Cochiti, questioned by the defense attorney, described the pueblo ruins at the southern site. He stated that if a line were drawn east and west through the pueblo ruins, all the agricultural lands of the valley would be below that line. He also indicated that the southern site appeared to be much older ruins than the northern site.

The defense, seeking to further sow doubt regarding the northern site as the boundary, questioned W. S. Loomis, a civil engineer and resident of Bland. He indicated that the agricultural lands of the Cañada de Cochiti fell south of the “Ruined Pueblo.” During a survey of the area, he had found that the northeast corner of the ruins was located 8,190 feet from the northwest corner of the current Cochiti Pueblo and that the amount of land enclosed between the Rio Grande River, the north line of the current Cochiti Pueblo and the boundary marked by the old ruins was 5,000 acres. Under cross-examination by the plaintiffs’ attorney, he admitted that he had not ventured to the areas north and could not say whether cultivation had occurred further up the canyon many years ago. Mr. Harris, recalled by the plaintiffs’ attorneys, was asked to mark the map of the Cañada de Cochiti according to the boundaries laid out by Mr. Loomis. He then stated that there was some land north of that boundary that appeared to have been cultivated in the past.

Lastly, Will M. Tipton was recalled to explain the Spanish unit of measurement known as the fanega. He stated that the fanega was a measurement of quantity for grain and vegetables. A fanega of corn was the equivalent of 8.82 English acres and a fanega of wheat was 1.53 acres; therefore, the land described in the original 1728 petition, being two fanegas of corn and ten of wheat amounted to a little less than 33 acres altogether. This explanation helped buttress the defense’s argument that the actual amount of land granted in 1728 was considerably smaller than what was claimed by the petitioners.

The approximate size of the grant could have been easily corroborated by the amount of land described in Francisca Varela Jaramillo’s will, which indicated the area measured 5,222 varas east to west. Assuming the north to south measurement was equivalent, and that the total area comprised 5,222 square varas, using a conversion rate of approximately one vara to 3 feet, the total area of the grant was 245,423,556 square feet, or the equivalent of just over 5,600 acres. It’s surprising that this argument was not raised by the defense.

Chief Justice Joseph R. Reed issued the court’s response to the petitioners on September 29, 1894. The opinion of the court acknowledged the petitioners as legitimate claimants under José Antonio Lucero de Godoy, the original grantee; recognized that Governor Bustamante had made a grant of land to Lucero de Godoy on August 2, 1728, now located in Bernalillo County; that Lucero’s heirs were entitled to the same claim of title and that the claim was valid under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. However, it greatly restricted the size of the grant, declaring that its boundaries were as follows: on the north by the Old Pueblo of Cochiti, which is situated on the Mesa of Cochiti on the south side of the Cañada of Cochiti (the southern site); on the east by the Río del Norte (Río Grande); on the south by the lands of the Cochiti Indians; and on the west by the same Old Pueblo of Cochiti as stated in the northern boundary (rather than the Jemez mountains as described in the original grant paper). The parcel so described contained approximately 5,000 acres of land—nearly 100,000 acres short of what the petitioners had claimed. The rest of the land was therefore to be reclaimed by the public domain.

The decision was hailed by The Albuquerque Weekly Citizen as “Rightly Settled! A Decision Favorable to the Poor Against the Sharks.” The article declared that “the effect of the ruling was to throw open the most valuable part of the Cochiti district—Bland, and its surrounding county and Allerton,” as these were mining areas. The paper described jubilant miners lighting bonfires along the peaks of the mountains all night and residents of the towns of Bland and Allerton holding “jollification meetings.” When news reached Albuquerque, crowds of people in groups of ten to twenty gathered to celebrate, “blocking every inch of the sidewalks on Railroad Avenue between First and Second Streets.”[iv]

Appeal to the US Supreme Court and Final Decision, (1894-1898)

As was their right, the petitioners decided to appeal the ruling to the US Supreme Court. However, the court dismissed the appeal on February 4, 1895, because of a delay in filing the transcripts of the case in Washington, DC. The US Attorney docketed the case for the court’s October session without informing the plaintiffs’ attorney, who failed to file the transcripts within sixty days. The Santa Fe New Mexican declared the dismissal a “Second Knock-Out”[v] but the plaintiffs’ attorney vowed to press on and “do all in my power to facilitate a conclusion of the litigation.” The CPLC allowed the filing of a new appeal on March 11th, and the case eventually came before the US Supreme Court in October 1896. On May 24, 1897, the Supreme Court reversed the CPLC’s ruling, remanding the case to the lower court. In accordance with the opinion of the Supreme Court, the CPLC issued a new ruling on February 16, 1898. The substance of the ruling declared that the boundaries of the area of the granted tract of land were as follows: on the north by Old Pueblo of Cochiti situated on the mesa of Cochiti on the southwesterly side of the Cañada de Cochiti (8,190 feet in a northerly direction from the northwest corner of the land of the Indians of Cochiti Pueblo), on the east by the Rio Grande River, on the south by the northern line of the lands of the Indians of Cochiti Pueblo and on the west by the crest of the first sierra of Jemez situated to the west of the said mesa of Cochiti. The effect of the ruling was to confer to the claimants a land grant comprising 19,112.78 acres,[vi] considerably more than the 5,000 acres originally allowed by the court but a great deal less than the more than 100,000 acres originally claimed.

Although the Cañada de Cochiti landowners never had any rights to any mineral deposits found on their land, the fact that the Cochiti mining area was outside the grant’s final boundaries was viewed as a victory for the public. Despite a second attempt by the Whitneys and the other plaintiffs to protest the precise boundary of the northern point of the grant for the purposes of the final survey, the grant was finally surveyed in September of 1900, and the patent (formal legal title to the grant) was recorded on March 7, 1901, for 19,112.78 acres.[vii]

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] William Harris stated that his mother had an interest in the Cañada de Cochiti grant, who must have been Hannah Harris.

[ii] Zenon Sandoval stated that he had lived in Conejos County in Colorado in 1870 and had served as the sheriff there for two terms and as school superintendent. In 1877 he moved back to Peña Blanca.

[iii] John Dixon stated that his ancestors were Cochiti Indians on the side of his father, Isidro Pancho, deceased.

[iv] Albuquerque Weekly Citizen, September 29, 1894, p. 1

[v] Santa Fe New Mexican, February 8, 1895, p. 1

[vi] History of New Mexico, Its Resources and People, Volume I, Pacific States Publishing Co., 1907, p. 175.

[vii] GAO, “Definition and List of Community Land Grants in New Mexico,” Exposure Draft, January 2001, p. 23.