Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

such secondary evidence of the existence, loss, and contents of said title papers as came to his knowledge, after a careful inquiry, for such testimony in places and from persons where the same was most likely

to be found; that the testimony heretofore taken herein was 133 all the testimony which deponent was aware of and enabled to obtain, before the submission of said cause, which deponent considered at all material or reliable in said cause; that deponent knew of the existence of other witnesses who could, in some minor points, corroborate the testimony of Mr. Tingley and others, but which testimony could add no more force to the testimony already taken, and which was withheld as immaterial by advice of Col. Crockett and other parties interested in the prosecution of said cause. Deponent further says that since the publication of the opinion of the court in this cause he has heard of very important testimony of which he was heretofore entirely ignorant; that said testimony is embraced in the affidavits of Judge Redmond and others herewith filed; that said Redmond was discovered as a witness in this cause by mere accident from hearing some remarks of C. B. Strode, esq., in the International Hotel in this city several days after the decision of said cause, and while he was in this city on a temporary visit. Deponent further says that the atty's and parties interested in said cause were entirely ignorant of the value of the testimony of C. B. Strode until after the publication of the opinion of the court herein; that said opinion occasioned talk and remarks which led claimants to the discovery of this and other testimony of which they were before entirely uninformed.

134

Deponent further says that he has made every endeavor to find the original title papers in said cause; that he has procured persons to go to Benicia and search for the title papers among the old papers of Mr. Sanford; that said persons have been unable to find said Sanford's papers, as appears from the affidavits herewith filed. Deponent further says that he has caused letters to be addressed to Mr. Winston and Mr. Richmond in the northern portion of this State to ascertain if they have said Sanford's papers, and that he has not yet been able to ascertain that said papers are now in existence, and he verily believes the same to be lost.

Deponent further says that he has been informed by Manuel Castro, former prefect of California, that he and Francisco Arce and two others, clerks under Micheltoreno and now living at Monterey, can all testify positively as to the existence and due execution of the original grant of said rancho from Micheltoreno to the Romeros.

Deponent further says that this affidavit and motion are not made. for the purpose of delay, but to further the ends of justice, and further says not.

Sworn and subscribed before me this 5th day of October, 1857.

E. A. LAWRENCE.

JNO. A. MONROE,
v. S. Commissioner.

Filed Nov. 20, 1857.

J. EDGAR GRIMES, Deputy Cl❜k.

135 Affidavit of J. W. Redmond, admitted as deposition by stipulation, p. 241.

In the district court of the United States for the northern district of the State of California.

[blocks in formation]

J. W. Redmond, of Santa Clara county, being sworn, deposes and says that he is a practicing attorney and has been for many years; that in 1849 he crossed the plains and arrived in California in August and settled in San José, and has resided there ever since; that he is a good latin scholar and learned the Spanish language with great facility on account of his knowledge of the latin: that he was elected county judge of Santa Clara county in April, 1850, on the first organization of the county, which office he held for more than three years, when he resigned; that previous to and during this period deponent was and still is a practicing attorney, practicing in all the courts excepting his own court; that he applied himself very diligently to learning the Spanish language, and in 1850 was sufficiently proficient therein to hold conversations and interpret title papers; that he had seen many of the acknowledged signatures of Micheltoreno, and was familiar with his handwriting from comparison; that the principal business of deponent was connected with the examination and 136 investigation of Spanish titles; that he was employed in almost every case pertaining to Spanish titles in San José; that he was engaged on one side or the other in nearly every case except in his own court, where there were law suits about Spanish titles.

Deponent further says that in 1850 he was employed by one Attozo or Attoza, a South American, to search the title of the Romeros to the tract of land in the county of Contra Costa, which said ranch is the subject matter of this suit, and to report to said Attoza as to the genuineness and validity to said title; that said Attoza was about to purchase a portion of said ranch and called on deponent 3 or 4 times. in regard thereto; that deponent had all the original title papers of the Romeros to said ranch in his hands at that time and carefully examined the same; that deponent had said papers in his possession for two weeks; that during the day he was engaged in court, but in the evenings and leisure time carefully examined said title papers; that the signature of Micheltorena to said documents were genuine, as deponent believes from his familiarity with his said signature; that said grant was a grant in fee of the land, and was in the usual form of such 137

Spanish concessions made by Micheltoreno, and was on stamped paper; that deponent was perfectly familiar at that time with such Spanish documents; that he had examined very many Spanish titles at Monterey, Santa Cruz, San José, and Martinez, in all of which towns deponent practiced.

[ocr errors]

Deponent further says that he examined said title; that it constituted a bundle of papers, sewed together, containing a petition by the three brothers Romero for the land, the reports of the alcalde Pico, also by Jimeno; also a desiña or map of the land, and a final concession by Micheltorena, in full and absolute property of the land solicited; that said title was full and complete, with the exception that it lacked the approval of the departmental assembly; that the description of the ranch was the sobrante, or all the land lying between the ranches of Julien Welch, Moraga, and Pacheco, and the surrounding neighbors, and had a Spanish name, which deponent has now forgotten; but deponent says he was upon the land either in the latter part of 1850, or early in 1851; that he had his notes of the grant with him, or the grant itself, at the time he was on the ranch, and knew the land; that it was situated in Contra Costa county, and negro Garcia was living on the land at that time; and deponent stoped 2 nights and 3 days with him at his house.

138

Deponent further says that he examined said title in connection with Geo. B. Tingley and Hon. James M. Jones, who is now deceased, and late judge of the district court of the southern district of California; that said Jones was an excellent Spanish scholar; that all three pronounced said title to be as valid and genuine a title as any in California, with the exception that it had not been approved by the departmental assembly; that said title was a full and absolute concession of the land; that upon said examination he advised said Attozo that it was safe to purchase, as said title was a good and valid title to the land.

Deponent further says that afterwards, and during same year, or early in 1851, he was employed by negro Garcia to defend a suit bro't. by Domingo Peralta vs. Garcia and Romero, in relation to a portion of this same land; that on the trial of said suit it became necessary to introduce the title papers of the Romeros above mentioned, and that they were had in court, and were examined and handed to the jury without objection, and were admitted by Mr. Sanford, the opposite counsel, to be a genuine and valid title to the land; that deponent further says that he again at this time examined said title, and found it to be the same as before mentioned; that the only point raised on said trial was that the title of Peralta was the oldest title, and that

therefore he was entitled to the land, the dispute being only 139 a dispute as to boundaries, the titles not being denied on

either side; deponent further says that Geo. B. Tingley was associated with deponent in the trial of said cause.

Deponent further says that Sanford, the attorney for Peralta, had a dispute with Garcia about an old fee which Sanford claimed as due him from Garcia, and which Garcia had never paid; that Sanford told deponent that he (deponent) would never get any fee from Garcia, as Garcia never paid any fees, and had never paid him the fees due him from Garcia; that the last deponent ever saw of said title papers they were in the hands of the jury on that trial; that he supposed the said papers belonged to the court, and he did not take them from the court, and did not know until recently that they had been withdrawn from its custody; that who took said papers after said trial, or what

became of them from that day to this, deponent is entirely ignorant; that said case afterwards went to the supreme court, but upon points not involving the validity of the title on either side.

Deponent further says that John Burton was alcalde at San José in 1847; that he is now dead; that said Burton was an English sailor and a very illiterate man; that he understood the provincial Spanish; both wrote aud spoke it very imperfectly; that deponent has 140 had frequent occasion, both as a judge and as an attorney, to examine his records, and that the same are very imperfect. Deponent believes that he has seen said Burton, and thinks that he has known him personally, but that the knowledge of the matters of which he speaks was derived from his examination of his papers and records, and from common report at San José, and from his records. and official documents having been frequently the subject of proof and judicial investigation before deponent as a judge and as an attorney. J. W. REDMOND.

Sworn and subscribed to before me this 25th day of Sept., 1857.
JNO. S. HAGER,
Dist. Judge 4th Ind. Dist.

[blocks in formation]

Geo. B. Tingley, of said county and district, being sworn, says that he is the same who was examined in the above entitled cause. Deponent further says that he stated upon said examination, and now says, that he carefully examined the original title papers of the Romeros, in said cause; that the same were a bundle of papers, commencing with the original petition, the informe, &c., and ending with an absolute grant of the land. Deponent further says that he has examined this day the Spanish documents, being 7 in number, attached to the deposition of his before the land commission, now on file in the surveyor general's office, and says that they are not the papers which he testified to in his previous examination; that those papers are bound together and do not have the appearance of ever having been.

Deponent further says that he was at the time of said trial perfectly familiar with Spanish grants; that a large portion of the business of deponent at that time was connected with the examination of Spanish titles; that he was sufficiently familiar with the Spanish language at that time to read and understand titles to lands, and

142

knows the title of the Romeros was a concession in fee of the sobrante, as stated in deponent's deposition.

Deponent further says that previous to this time he was called upon by one Attozo, who was about to purchase a portion of said rancho, to examine and report upon the title; that said title papers were placed in his hands for examination; that after a careful examination of said papers he pronounced said title to be a genuine and valid title in full property and not a provisional grant. Deponent further says that it is his impression that Judge Redmond and James M. Jones, now deceased, of Santa Clara county, examined said title with deponent; that said Jones was a thorough Spanish scholar, and that it was the opinion of all three that said title was a valid title or concession, in the usual form, to the petitioners; the only question in the minds of deponent and the others was that said grant had not been approved by the departmental assembly, and there was a doubt at that time whether such grants were valid. Deponent gave his opinion that a title was valid without such approval.

Deponent further says that if the papers on file in the surveyor general's office are part of the papers used upon said trial, that they

143

are not all of them; that there was an additional paper, dated some time after the report of Pico, the alcalde, on which was a final concession of the land, in the usual form, conceding the land prayed for to the petitioners and their families, which said concession was signed by Micheltorena, and was much longer than any paper or memorandum signed by Micheltoreno in the suveyor general's office.

GEO. B. TINGLEY.

Sworn and subscribed before me this 24th day of Sept., 1857.
P. K. WOODSIDE,

Filed Nov. 20th, 1857.

Notary Public.

J. EDGAR GRIMES,
Dep't. Ci'k.

Affidavit of C. B. Strode.

U. S. district court for the northern district of California.

[blocks in formation]

C. B. Strode, of the city of San Francisco, being sworn, says that he is a practicing attorney in said city, and has been since the fall of 1850; that he now resides in Oakland; that immediately after his

arrival in this city he went into copartnership with Wm. 144 Carey Jones in the practice of the law; that shortly afterwards

,

Hon. P. W. Tompkins became a member of the same firm, under the name of Jones, Tompkins & Strode; that the principal business of said firm was the prosecution of land claims before the

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »