Cañon de San Diego Land Grant (Part 2 of 3)

Dispute Between Private Land Grant and Community Land Grant (1876-1883)

More than a decade after the end of the civil war, in June 1876, correspondence from the US Surveyor General indicated that the contract for surveying the Cañon de San Diego land grant and several others had been made in April of that year. Henry Beaumont, on behalf of several of the heirs of the original community land grantees, submitted sworn testimony from four witnesses in July 1876 regarding the boundaries of the grant. However, it appears that heirs of the private land grant came forward to dispute it, delaying any official action regarding the survey.

On December 29, 1879, descendants of the García brothers—Agustín del Valle (B3(2)a) and Amado Chávez (A4(1)b1)[i]—filed a petition with the US Surveyor General for the private portion of the Cañon de San Diego land grant. They submitted the original grant papers and attested that the original grantees and their descendants and heirs had been in continuous and lawful possession of the land from 1788 to the present day. In a subsequent filing, dated January 22, 1880, Chávez called attention to the correspondence already described between Governor Manrique and chief alcalde Vergara in 1808, which had been found in the Spanish Archives of New Mexico. That same day, in support of his claim, Chávez questioned three witnesses in the presence of US Surveyor General Henry M. Atkinson.

The first witness, Santiago García y Montoya (A1a1), declared that he was a 53-year-old farmer and resident of the town of Guadalupe who had been born on the land grant and lived there for twenty years. He described the boundaries of the grant and authenticated the original grant papers, saying that he had seen them in the year 1840 in the hands of Nerio Montoya (B1(1)b). He understood that when the original grantee Francisco had passed away, the grant papers passed to his brother Antonio, upon whose death they had passed to his grandson Nerio.

The second witness, Nerio Antonio Montoya (B1(1)b), declared that he was a 73-year-old farmer and resident of the town of Nacimiento. He described the boundaries of the grant, saying that he went to live upon the grant in 1822 and had lived there up until October 1879. He stated that he knew his grandfather, Antonio, who had lived at the mouth of the canyon near the junction of the two rivers and that he knew of no other conflicting claims with the land. He testified that the two Cañon de San Diego grants had always been considered distinct and separate and that the grant papers had come into his possession upon the death of his mother, María Rita García de Noriega (B1) in 1852. He delivered the papers to his first cousin Captain Agustín del Valle (B3(2)a) so that he could file them with the US Surveyor General. Mr. Montoya authenticated the grant papers presented to him as the same ones that he had filed. He also stated that he had not known his great-uncle Francisco García de Noriega, as he had been killed by the Apache Indians when Nerio was very young.

The third witness, Agustín del Valle (B3(2)a), declared that he was a 48-year-old carpenter and resident of the town of Bernalillo. He testified that the documents in possession of the US Surveyor General were indeed the same documents that Nerio Montoya had given to him and that Mr. Chávez had filed.

Chávez also submitted, as proof of descendency of the claimants, the will of María Francisca Gutiérrez, dated July 11, 1799, and a statement regarding the heirs and assignees of the interest passed down from Antonio García (Exhibit 1). Subsequent land transactions resulted in the ownership shown in Exhibit 2. The document stated that the heirs of Francisco García were as yet unknown, but the petition likewise supported their claims under the same grant.

Exhibit 1: Initial ownership structure, grandchildren of Antonio García de Noriega

Heir	Ownership
Juan Montoya (B1(1)a)	1/6
Nerio Montoya (B1(1)b)	1/6
Agustín del Valle (B3(2)a)	1/6
Adelina del Valle (B3(2)b)	1/6
Agapito García (B4a)	1/3
Grand Total	1

Exhibit 2: Final ownership structure, heirs and assignees

Heir	Ownership
Juan Montoya (B1(1)a)	1/15
Nerio Montoya (B1(1)b)	1/5
Agustín del Valle (B3(2)a)	8/15
T.M.T Cazin	1/5
Grand Total	1

On March 22, 1880, Mr. Atkinson issued his opinion on the case. Observing that the grant documents were “no doubt genuine” and that the evidence of the case showed continuous occupation of the claimed tract of land by the grantees and their heirs, he declared the grant to be valid and approved it in the names of the heirs and legal representatives of the original grantees. He set the boundaries as those established by the act of possession executed on February 6, 1788 and ordered the transmission of the documents to Congress for approval. This was a bit unusual, as Congress had already approved the community grant with the same name. This discrepancy would later lead to further disputes between the two parties of claimants. When the private grant parcel was surveyed in May 1880, it was found to contain 9,752.57 acres. Although a record of the survey of the larger community grant has not yet been found, it is likely that it was surveyed at the same time. The community grant comprised 116,286.89 acres.[ii]

On January 26, 1881, the General Land Office sent a letter to Mr. Atkinson informing him that it had received a patent application for the Cañon de San Diego land grant and requested a report based on all original approved field notes as a basis for the patent. Mr. Atkinson responded by submitting a report on March 3rd. On October 27th, the General Land Office transmitted the patent dated October 21, 1881, instructing the surveyor general to deliver it to the parties legally entitled to its custody. That mandate was not entirely straightforward, given the dispute between the two groups of claimants.

In the meantime, Amado Chávez ((A4(1)b1) bought parcels of land in the Cañon de San Diego from his relatives, descendants of Francisco García. Exhibit 3 summarizes these transactions. It is unclear if there were other descendants who retained an ownership stake in the grant, so it is not possible to present the precise title structure of the land on that side of the family.

Exhibit 3: Land transactions from descendants of Francisco García de Noriega[iii]

Date	Grantors	Grantee
19 February 1881	Manuel Chávez (A4(1)a), Vicenta Labadie (spouse); Román A. Baca (A4(2)b), Ramona Labadie (spouse); Guadalupe Chávez; Juan José Baca (A4(2)a); María Chávez (A4(1)a5; Dolores Chávez (A4(1)a2, Casimiro García (spouse); Juana María Chávez (A4(1)a3), Juan Durán (spouse); Luz Chávez (A4(1)a4), Francisco Abreu (spouse); Román Chávez, Veneranda Castillo (spouse); José Manuel Chávez, Espiridiona Gutiérrez (spouse); Rafael Chávez, Amalia Sánchez (spouse); Perfilia Chávez, Desiderio Márquez (spouse); Julián Chávez (A4(1)a6), Perfecta Candelaria (spouse); Eugenia Chávez (A4(1)a1), Manuel Montaño (spouse); Rosario Chávez (A4(1)c1), Ramón Salazar (spouse); Nicolasa Chávez (A4(1)a7), Juan Pablo Chávez (spouse)	Francisco Chávez
19 March 1881	Feliciana García (A3j), Jesús Dimas (spouse); Rosarito García (A3g), Juan Luis Montoya (spouse)	Amado Chávez
25 April 1881	Ramón García (A3a), Teresa García (spouse); Rosa García (A3b), Luis Padilla; Domingo García (A3c), Bárbara Sánchez (spouse); Desiderio García (A3d); Concepción García (A3e); Miguel García (A3f), Andrea Romero (spouse); Simon García (A3h)	Amado Chávez
14 July 1881	Juan García (A1b), Luz Montoya (spouse)	Amado Chávez
14 September 1881	Sabino García (A3i), Apolonia C. de Baca (spouse)	Amado Chávez

A group of claimants representing the private land grant—Amado Chávez ((A4(1)b1), Román A. Baca (A4(2)b), José Francisco Chávez and Charles H. Gildersleeve—filed a lawsuit for the October 1881 session of the Bernalillo County District Court against Mariano S. Otero, Miguel A. Otero, Francisco M. Perea and T.M.T Cazin as well as the unknown heirs of Antonio García de Noriega. The group claimed the private land grant, as approved by the surveyor general. They pointed out that the tract of land contained a large number of medicinal springs “possessing extraordinary curative properties” that were the grant’s principal value and that the defendants had confederated together with the express intent to appropriate the springs. The complaint alleged that the defendants were making preparations to erect fences around the springs and to establish hotels and other structures for their exclusive enjoyment and profit. They therefore called upon the court to issue a subpoena to the defendants so that the property could be partitioned.

Each party, evidently aware that a patent for the land grant had been issued, wrote to the surveyor general requesting that he deliver it to them. The first request came from Charles H. Gildersleeve, dated December 9, 1881, claiming to be one of the owners of the grant and attorney for the other owners, asking for delivery of the patent. A second request, dated January 21, 1882 from Mariano S. Otero, claimed he was an owner and representative of the community land grantees, authorized to receive the patent. He presented as proof a power of attorney signed by all the claimants. He also informed the surveyor general that the New Mexico Territorial Assembly had passed an act on January 14, 1876 authorizing the owners and claimants of the grant to appoint a board of commissioners to investigate and document all ownership claims. Mr. Otero submitted a certified copy of the commission’s report recording the title deeds of all owners and claimants. He went on to state that he had been informed that Charles H. Gildersleeve, representing himself, Amado Chávez ((A4(1)b1), Román A. Baca (A4(2)b), José Francisco Chávez and others, had demanded delivery of the patent and protested any such action. Referring to the lawsuit filed in the Bernalillo District Court, he argued that the opposing parties were claiming a large portion of land within the boundaries of the Cañon de San Diego grant, in direct opposition to the patent. Therefore, they could not possibly be legal custodians of a document that they purported to refute.

On February 9, 1882, the General Land Office wrote to Mr. Atkinson about the dispute, requesting him to forward any information he had on the subject. In another letter dated March 20th, the General Land Office directed Mr. Atkinson to retain the patent until ownership of the land was settled. However, if delivery of the patent was essential for the purposes of the pending litigation, he was authorized to deliver it to a responsible person to hold it in trust until the court determined which party was legally entitled to it.

The case was still pending in October 1883, as at that time Román A. Baca (A4(2)b) filed another lawsuit, very similar to the one filed in 1881, asking for the court to partition the land and to designate an individual to hold the patent in trust in the meantime. Additional records for the case have not yet been found, so it is unclear when or if the court ruled on this matter. One clue indicates that the case may have been settled in favor of the community land grant. On July 28, 1886, Mariano S. Otero acknowledged receipt of the land grant patent from US Surveyor General George W. Julian. Regardless of the outcome, litigation in the case continued ten years later under the jurisdiction of the Court of Private Land Claims (CPLC).

Continued in Part 3 

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. 100 and Survey General Reports Nos. 25 & 122.

[i] See Cañon de San Diego Land Grant Genealogy page on this blog.

[ii] United States General Accounting Office, "Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo: Definition and List of Community Land Grants in New Mexico," Exposure Draft, January 2001. Available at: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-01-330

[iii] New Mexico Archives Online, Fray Angélico Chávez History Library, New Mexico Taxation and Revenue Department Collection (AC 170), Available at:  https://nmarchives.unm.edu/repositories/10/resources/165