Private Land Claims are a class of land in the United States, having their origin from governments preceding the United States in sovereignty. The history of private land claims in the U.S. dates back to 1793 to the Definitive Treaty with Great Britain. From then until the Gadsden Purchase in 1853, many private land claims were contested against the United States. In order to validate these claims, Acts Of Congress, dating from 1805, established Boards of Land Commissioners. The main function of these Boards was to protect any valid claim and the guarding against confirmation of fraudulent or unfounded claims.

In California, the private claims arose from the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, between the U. S. and Mexico. The Treaty stated that, property of every kind now belonging to Mexicans would be respected and that they would enjoy them as if the property belonged to citizens of the United States.

The term, "Mexican" encompassed more than people of Mexican descent. By Mexican law, anyone who became a Catholic and a Citizen of Mexico was accorded the title of Mexican. Prior to California statehood. many foreigners of British, German, Irish and other ethnic groups, became Mexicans in order to acquire land from Mexico.

The United States Congress on March 3, l 85 l established, "An Act to Ascertain and Settle Private Land Claims in the State of California,"(U.S. Statutes at Large, Volume 9. Page 631). This Act established the Board of Land Commissioners to hear the claims in California. The Commission was authorized to issue subpoenas, administer oaths, take testimony and to decide as to the validity of claims. and therein be governed by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. Appeal by the claimant and/or the District Attorney, was authorized to the United States District Court, with further appeal to the United States Supreme Court.

Again, the main function of the Board was to protect any valid claim and the guarding against confirmation of fraudulent or unfounded claims. Claims were rejected for many reasons, some of which were lack of proof, non occupation and failure to produce any proof of a grant from the Mexican Republic. However, the most famous of the fraudulent claims is the two grants asked for by Jose Y. Limantour of lands in San Francisco County and of three islands in San Francisco Bay. The Board initially confirmed both grants, however the District Court had the following to say about them. "It is no slight satisfaction to feel that the evidence has been such as to leave nothing to inference, suspicion or conjecture, but that the proofs of fraud are as conclusive and irresistible as the attempted fraud itself has been flagrant and audacious". I-his case was not appealed to the United States Supreme Court.

The procedures in the act placed the burden of proof, on the persons seeking confirmation of the land titles. The Board heard 809 cases, confirmed 604 and rejected 190. The other 15 were withdrawn. Of these 809 cases, only 3 were not appealed to the District Court, thus being the only ones actually confirmed by the Board. Appeal from the decision of the Board was allowed, to the District Court. Of the 604 appealed to the District Court, 582 were confirmed and the rest rejected. Of these 582, 490 were appealed to the United States Supreme Court, and they refused to hear (dismissed) 280 cases.

Lands claimed, but rejected or claimed and confirmed but not presented within two years from the date of the Act, were to be considered public lands of the United States.

Prior to final confirmation, the claimant of an unconfirmed land grant was entitled to a preliminary survey once a deposit to cover the projected cost of the survey was deposited with the Surveyor General. After the Act of July 31, 1876, the payment of the costs of survey and platting was required in all cases, not just for preliminary surveys, since the Government required payment for costs, prior to the issuing of a final patent.

Once the Private Land claim was finally confirmed, a patent was to issue, which could not happen until a final approved field survey, made by the Surveyor General, had been completed. This in itself sounded simple, however the reality is a little more complicated. Once the survey was asked for and completed, more problems could arise. Anyone having an objection to the survey could object to the survey, these objections were not required to be made under oath, but merely by written objection, showing the interest of the objector and signed by him or his attorney, as provided in the Act of July 1, 1864.

Once a claim was finally confirmed by the United States, the U. S. Could not be sued by anyone else claiming title to that land grant. If a controversy existed as to the legal owner of the grant, or to the location of the surveyed lines, this would be a problem between the patentee and whomever had an adverse claim and if need be, to be settled in court, without the United States being involved. Once all problems, if any, with the survey had been resolved, a final patent could issue to the patentee.

As recently as 1993, I received an inquiry from the United States, Department of State. They wanted to know what their recourse was concerning an inquiry from Puerto Rico. A family had inherited some papers from a relative and among them was an old deed to a portion of a granted private land claim. The question was, "Could they sue the United States, because they patented the land"? The answer is no, because the final decision by the Board of Land Commissioners, The District Court and/or the United States Supreme Court are conclusive between the United States and claimants only and shall not affect the claims of third parties. Whether at this late stage they had any rights against anyone else is questionable.

In 1859, Judge Ogdon Hoffman of the United States District Court, while presiding on the confirmation of Private Land claims, requested from the U. S. Surveyor General of California the procedures for the surveying of the private land claims. On September 2, 1859, J. W. Mandeville the U.S. Surveyor General of California, forwarded to Judge Hoffman a list of Instructions from the General Land Office which would govern his actions in surveying the private land claims in California.

Following is an abstract of these Instructions:

1. A patent shall issue to the claimant upon his presenting to the General Land Office a certificate of confirmation and a plat of survey certified and approved by the Surveyor General of California.

2. The Surveyor General shall cause all private land claims finally confirmed to be accurately surveyed and to furnish plats of the same.

3. In the survey, the decree of confirmation must govern and where the terms of the decree are specific, they must be exactly observed on fixing the locality of and surveying the claim.

4. Where the record and the decree of final confirmation, fix the area claimed and the map delineating the limits gives a surface larger than the area confirmed, the location is to be taken within that surface in a compact form, according to the lines of the Public Surveys, at the election of the confirmee as to the precise locality, but in such a manner, whenever practicable, as to not to interfere with any adverse claim. Where this is not practicable consistently with the calls of the confirmation, the law is explicit as to the proceedings for the settlement of the conflict.

5. In any case such as the proceeding, confirmee must be formally requested by the Surveyor General to give in writing a specific designation of the locality he may elect within the extended limits indicated by the plat in the record. A period should be fixed within which confirmee should be required to make his election. In default of compliance, Surveyor General shall fix the location, having due regard to the rights of the confirmee, and in conformity to the record.

6. When a grant contains the words poco mas o menos (a little more or less) the meaning is plain that the Surveyor General is to be governed by the area confirmed, but if in running out the lines of the confirmed claim, there is a little more or less than the fixed quantity, it is to be considered as not in any manner affecting the validity of the survey.

7. If the claimants paper's or the decision of the Board of Private Land Claim Commissioners show to the satisfaction of the Surveyor General that the claim ought rightfully to be located as to cover in its area none but firm land, the surveying of swamp or overflowed land shall be omitted although such claim may call to bind on the water. The excluded swamp or overflowed land to be a matter for the claimant and the State of California to adjust.

8. Where the evidence is unmistakable from the calls of survey, or other papers, that a portion of swamp or overflowed land was designed to be included within the area of the claim, the Surveyor General shall direct the survey of it, according to such evidence.

9. In reference to point #4: Where persons have purchased lands from the holders of the grants and made settlements in good faith, the Surveyor General shall treat such sales, and the settlement there under, as evidence of the election to that extent of the location of the finally confirmed claim, taking care to conform, respecting the whole location of such claim, to the other requirements under point #4.

10. Where confirmed claims conflict, the Surveyor General shall have the power as the Register of the Land Office and receiver of public moneys had by virtue of the 6th Section of the Act of 3rd of March 1831, namely to decide between the parties, in such a manner as may be consistent with justice. It shall be the duty of the Surveyor General to have those claims surveyed and platted in accordance with such decision.

11. The Surveyor General shall, before proceeding to field operations, make a call, in writing, upon the several claimants where confirmed claims conflict, to file with him an authentic showing of the "conditional lines or boundaries" which may have been or may be agreed upon between them. A period affording a reasonable time shall be fixed for a reply. In case of default the Surveyor General shall decide between the parties consistent with the principles of justice, and shall cause a return of survey to be made exhibiting in black ink on the plat the exact limits according to the decree of final confirmation, and in default of such conditional lines, those lines adjudged by the Surveyor General to be those of the survey of the tract, which shall be carried into patent.

12. In any case where a survey under a decree of final confirmation shall fall wholly within the limits of another, the grade of title, and date of confirmation, will be the essential data in determining as to which will take precedence. In any such case, the Surveyor General should make a full report to the General Land Office of all the facts, with illustrative diagrams, and the decision made, notifying the claimants of its purport and then await the ultimate decision of the Department of the Interior.

As previously stated, General Instructions were only a guide to the accomplishment of the task of surveying the Private Land Claims. Usually, when the Surveyor General appointed a Deputy Surveyor to survey a Private Land Claim, he issued to him Special Instructions for the procedures to be used. Following are the Special Instructions issued to A. W. Von Schmidt, for the surveying of the "Los Mariposas."

Surveyor Generals Office
San Francisco, Cal. March 31, 1852

Surveyor General's Instructions to A. W. Von Schmidt U.S. Deputy Surveyor

Sir,

You are hereby appointed a Deputy Surveyor of the United States for this State as far as may be necessary to enable you to execute a survey of the tract known as the "Los Mariposas," to the extent of ten sitios de ganada mayor within the limits of the "Sierra Nevada and the rivers called the Chowchillas, the Merced and the San Joaquin," and which you will perceive by the enclosed copy of the order of survey made by the Board of Land Commissioners on the 28th January 1852, they required to be made by, "treating the said quantity of ten sitios according to the claim of the said Fremont and reference to the sketch in plan annexed to this petition, but in such manner as to confine said location within the said limits, and to include in the survey so to be made the same quantity of ten sitios."

Enclosed you have a copy of the Map, a sketch signed by Alvarado thus referred to us as being annexed to the petition, and in the absence of more precise directions from the Commissioners, you will have to make the survey in conformity to the wishes of the claimant, controlled however and governed by the Alvarado Map. Should the claimant desire any other lines to be run as the boundaries of the claim, than those which upon a personal examination of the Country you should consider as being those intended by the Alvarado Map, you are at liberty to run them, in addition to those you consider the intended boundaries. The reasons for your assuming any lines or corners as the true ones of the claim, whether derived from an inspection of the ground, or the testimony which may be offered you, should be stated in your field book.

Should you be appraised of their being any interfering claim or title based upon any alleged Spanish or Mexican grant, you will notify the owner thereof ( in writing ) or the parties in possession of the line, when you propose executing the work, so that they may be present at the running of the lines, if they should so desire; and if they object to any line or corner, you will keep full notes of the reasons and character of the objections and the names and residences of such persons as either party may believe to be able to give important evidence; and you will also carefully preserve and return any papers, etc., which may be given you, bearing upon the subject. If any line or comer is agreed upon, it must be so entered in your field book, with the names of the consenting parties, etc.

You will be careful in making personal observations as to the variations of the needles and as a check upon the accuracy of your courses and distances, it would be very advisable for you to survey some of your corners with each other or with some prominent natural object, by a series of accurately observed angles, all the particulars in relation thereto, to be entered in your field book. After making the survey of the lines, you may deem the intended boundaries of the claim, you will proceed to ascertain the area embraced thereby and should you find it to exceed that of ten sitios, you will curtail the survey to that area, by running such line or lines as may be necessary for that purpose.

You should erect mounds or posts at your corners, or else identify them in such a way, that it may be easy at any time, from your notes, to ascertain their position with certainty and without difficulty. Your survey must be made in chains and or links, in relation to the Commissioners chain, in this office and by the true meridian and the topography of the country is to be fully noted in your field book, and wherever plans or diagrams will elucidate any point, they should be made in your field book.

Your field book, when returned, will have to be accompanied by an accurate map, showing all the lines run by you, on a suitable scale and exhibiting the topography of the country. Before entering upon the survey, you and your men will have to be qualified in the manner

prescribed when executing public work, and your field book will have to be verified by yourself and them, in the manner directed in the general instructions.

Your report in relation to the execution of the survey should be full and minute and such as will afford all the information possible, going on to explain the reasons for adopting and running the lines, and thus make the Land Commissioners and this office, acquainted with all the facts, connected therewith, which you may be able to ascertain during the execution of the work.

As you have made an agreement, with the parties interested. in relation to your compensation, for making the survey etc., nothing is required to be said by me, upon this subject, except that under no circumstances whatever, is this office to be made in any manner responsible for any expenses growing out of the same.

Very Respectfully
Your Obedient Servant
Samuel D. Kina

Along with Special Instructions from the Surveyor General, the Decisions of The Department of the Interior and General Land Office in Cases Relating to the Public Lands, from 1882 to 1928, also have instructions for surveying various private land claims.

Rio de Los Americanos

In June 1844 William Leidesdorff became a Mexican Citizen and in August 1844 he petitioned for land along the American River as follows:

I, the citizen William A. Leidesdorff, a native of Denmark, and naturalized in the Mexican Republic before your Excellency, with our respect represent: That being the owner of a large amount of stock, and desiring to obtain a tract of land on which to place them: I have found such a tract, bounded by the lands of Senor Sutter, as is shown by the annexed map: Said lands is situated on the banks of the American River, and contains 8 square leagues, that is, four leagues in length by two leagues in width. Wherefore, I pray Your Honor be pleased to grant me said land, in which I shall receive favor, Swearing that I ask this in good faith, and to whatever is necessary. Monterey, April 29th, 1844.

Leidesdorff had to take judicial possession of the grant on the American River. He visited Captain Sutter and they rode their horses to the oak marked with a slash, that was the line where Leidesdorff's land adjoined Sutter's. Sutter as the Mexican Justice of the Peace, gave judicial possession, he grant was dated October 1, 1844.

Leidesdorff died on May 18, 1848 of what was described as brain fever, at the age of 38. Leidesdorff died without a wife or other family. Leidesdorff had accumulated a great amount of wealth, in his short life, and this was all secured and taken charge of by the Commanding United States Army Officer in San Francisco, under the mistaken assumption that he was an American Citizen. There was no Probate Court in California at this time and no laws to govern probate proceedings. Colonel Mason wrote that,..."As soon as I can get the laws, now being printed in San Francisco, a court will be organized for that district, if I can find a suitable person for Judge, having jurisdiction to all that relates of administrators and the settlement of the estates of deceased persons".

At the time of Leidesdorff's death, Joseph L. Folsom, a West Point graduate, was serving in the Quartermasters Corps in San Francisco and was also collector of the port. When he heard of Leidesdorff's death, he started a search for Leidesdorff s family, if any, in an effort to make an offer for the heavily encumbered estate. From Leidesdorff's friends and acquaintances he was able to ascertain that family remained in St. Croix. In 1849 he went to Saint Croix and met with Leidesdorff's mother, his sister and niece, the only remaining family. Folsom offered the heirs $75,000 for all right and title to Leidesdorff's estate, which they accepted, to be paid with a $5000 deposit and 2 more payments of $35,000 each, one in 6 months and the other in a year. The estate, encompassed not only the Los Americanos grant, but numerous properties in the City of San Francisco, which together were worth many, many times more than this. When the first $35,000 was due the mother, Anna Sparks, refused the payment and also refused to give Folsom a conveyance as first agreed. The mother had heard, from speculators that had visited her, that the estate was worth a great deal more than Folsom had offered.

On February 12, 1851, the First Alcalde of San Francisco found that Anna Maria Sparks was the sole heir to the Leidesdorff estate and that Joseph Folsom was to receive all of the Leidesdorff property from the administrator, per his agreement with Sparks. Folsom by borrowing money had paid off the $80,000 owed against the estate and the $75,000 owed to the inheritors. Some of the buildings in San Francisco had been burned and titles to others he had to prove in court at his own expense. He also had to acquire good title to the land grant in Sacramento County.

This land grant was initially submitted to the Land Commission on September 4, 1852 and confirmed on August 12, 1855 by the Commission and the boundaries in said decree are described as follows: ...beginning at an oak tree on the bank of the American River marked as boundary to the lands granted to John A. Sutter, and running thence south with the line of said Sutter, two leagues, thence easterly by lines parallel with the general direction of the said American River and at the distance, as near as may be, of two leagues therefrom, four leagues or so far as may be necessary to include in the tract the quantity of eight square leagues; thence northerly, by a line parallel to the one described above, to the American River; thence along the southern bank of said river, and bounding thereon, to the point of beginning.

On February 23, 1857 it was confirmed by the District Court, and soon after this decree, the United States Attorney General having decided not to appeal to the Supreme Court on this decision, the following decree was entered: "It is ordered, adjudged and decreed that the claimants have leave to proceed under the decree of the Land Commission heretofore rendered in their favor, as under final decree.

Soon after, the grant was surveyed and on the 29th of May 1857, 29 days after the last decree was entered, a survey was completed, returned and approved by the Surveyor General of California. This survey was known as the Hays Survey.

The survey was then sent to the Department of Interior, for examination, and the issuance of a patent, should it meet the approval of the department. While the survey was in the process of being approved, Mr. Folsom began to sell parcels of the Rancho and the Town of Folsom was surveyed and lots were sold. Mr. Folsom died suddenly, in 1858 and he was not alive, when news was sent that the survey did not meet the approval of the Department, upon examination, the survey was disapproved. On Sept. 2, 1858 the Secretary of the Interior made the decision that the survey did not conform to either, the description of the land granted by the Mexican Government, the land as shown on the Diseno, or the decree of the Court? he remanded it to the Surveyor General for a re-survey.

The administrators of the Folsom Estate obtained an order from Judge Hoffman, of the District Court, up on the California Surveyor General, to return into court the plat and certificate of the "Hays Survey", that the court might proceed to ascertain the lines, &c., of the land confirmed. Under order of the court, testimony was taken and a motion was made by the claimants to confirm the, "Hays Survey". Judge Hoffman on review of the facts, decided that the "Hays Survey" was erroneous because the Diseno from which the survey was based, was erroneous. It having been found that the general course of the river is from northeast to southwest, and not from east to west as indicated on the Diseno. Judge Hoffman perceived that if the Board had known the Diseno was in error, they would have corrected it. The facts were a little more involved than this, but this was the substance of the argument. Judge Hoffman then refused the motion to confirm the "Hays Survey".

On Nov. 22, 1859 Judge Hoffman ordered the Surveyor General to return to court a further survey, which had been done and approved by him and which was known as the "Mandeville Survey". After testimony was taken and the case argued, Judge Hoffman, on Nov. 18, 1861, delivered an opinion deciding that neither the "Hays Survey" or the "Mandeville Survey" were correct and ordered another survey, upon principles laid down by him and filed a decree with his opinion.

On June 25, 1862 this case again came into Judge Hoffman's Court, again in regards to the "Hays Survey", the "Mandeville Survey" and the "Hoffman Survey", ordered by Judge Hoffman in 1859. Judge Hoffman reiterates the previous arguments about the surveys and why he ordered a new one made. He also discusses the hardships that will befall many purchasers of land within the Folsom Grant, if the "Hays Survey" is truly disallowed. In the end, on July 2, 1862, Judge Hoffman reverses his earlier decision to set aside the "Hays Survey" and approves the survey. The following is stated in the decree:

[Where the decree of the Board of Commissioners, of the District Court, or of the Supreme Court, locating a grant, is specific and plain, and it has long been accepted as finally and definitely locating the land, and large interests have been acquired on the faith of this finality, the location ought not to be disturbed, except in the case of manifest error, and on clear proof of the incorrectness of the location, and not on the mere ground that, if the question were new, the court might have located the land differently.]

You might think that this would take care of all the problems, however the United States took exception to this ruling and appealed the decision to the United States Supreme Court. The case was argued on March 16-22, 1864.

The court affirmed the decree of Judge Hoffman and stated that," The answer to all efforts of this kind is, that the decree as a finality, not only on the question of title, but as to the boundaries it specifies. If erroneous in either particular, the remedy was by appeal; but the appeal having been withdrawn by the government, the question of its correctness is forever closed."

It appears that the Hays Survey would have been upheld by the Supreme Court, if Judge Hoffman had not reversed himself.

The final patent for this land claim was issued on September 28, 1864, approximately 7 years after dismissal of appeal and 12 years since the initial submittal to the Board.

PRE-PUBLICATION ANNOUNCEMENT..............
LAND GRANTS IN ALTA CALIFORNIA

A Compilation of Spanish and Mexican private land claims in the State of California Crisostomo N. Perez

This is a definitive reference book detailing pertinent data in relation to the United States of America's confirmation and patenting of land grant claims, together with a confirmation of legislation and litigation affecting each claim.

Spanish and Mexican law controlled all land titles and boundaries in California prior to statehood on September 9, 1850, when the first legislature adopted the common law of England, changing the entire system of land titles and boundaries in California. However, at the close of the Mexican War the United States entered into the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo with the Republic of Mexico. The treaty provided for confirmation of the land titles in the new states by the United States and Congress and in 1851 the Board of Land Commissioners was established. The Board heard 809 cases, confirmed 604 and rejected 190. Most were appealed to the District Courts and finally to the United States Supreme Court. Not only does the book list all pertinent data about each rancho claim--name, patentee, county, original grantee, docket number, and more--it also includes case citations, Spanish royal ordinances, United States survey instructions, congressional documents both in text and list, department of interior decisions, and those that found their way to the State Supreme Court.

There is a glossary of terms, a table of measures, a bibliography and reading list. The human side is not neglected, with the forgotten Jasper O'Farrell restored to his proper niche as a surveyor of 22 Mexican land grants between 1844 and 1846. Every California history library should have this reference work within reach.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR..........

Crisostomo N. Perez is a Boundary Determination Officer with the California State Lands Commission where his work, for the past two decades, has involved land title and boundary locations. During the course of his work he has become an expert not only on the location and retracement of Mexican land grant lines but also on the origin of the grants and the process by which they were confirmed or rejected by the United States after the Mexican War.

Mr. Perez is a Professional Land Surveyor in California, and he has instructed surveying classes at Sacramento City College. Mr. Perez has participated in litigation as an expert on a number of occasions and has consulted on land grant title and boundary issues in California.