Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

ENTERED according to Act of Congress, in the year of our Lord eighteen hundred and sixty,

BY ALEX. P. GREENE,

In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the Northern District of the State of California.

LETTERS.

No. I.

SAN FRANCISCo, June 29, 1860.

The late letter of Mr. Attorney General Black to the President of the United States, on the subject of claims to lands in California, is pregnant with interest to all the people of this State. Of the points stated in it, I desire to call present attention to this paragraph:

"It must be distinctly understood that I impute no blame whatever to any of the law agents or other representatives of the United States Government in California for allowing so many of these false papers to pass unchallenged: much less can any charge on that account be laid at the door of the Judges. They had not the means of detection within their reach, and without the appropriations voted by Congress for that purpose, the frauds could never have been detected.”

What I wish to say in reference to this paragraph is, that if "no blame" is to be attached to the "law agents" or "other representatives" of the United States, in the matter of land claims in this State, and in allowing false papers to "pass unchallenged," then facts have lost their significance. As to the first of the claims referred to in the Attorney General's letter as fraudulent-namely, the "Limantour "-it is hardly possi ble that any person versed in the subject of land titles here could have at any moment considered it genuine. At all events, I pronounced it to be a fraud in the first day that I knew of its existence. That denunciation happened to be in the presence of one of the Commissioners and of the Law Agent of the United States, and a number of other persons, in the Commissioner's office on California Street. At the time the subject arose, I was engaged in taking testimony in a case before Mr.

Commissioner Hiland Hall. On a subsequent occasion, when, after some years of expedient inactivity, the case of Limantour "came on, to be heard," as the legal phrase and understanding are, the Commission refused to hear anything, on account of a stipulation, and an unfortunately protracted absence of the law agent (Mr. McKune,)-a case, as it seemed to me, of what is called in Legislative dodging "pairing off." Two or three gentlemen of the bar, interested both for clients and for the welfare and honor of the city, desired to address the Board in opposition to the claim, and were refused a hearing. Among them was a gentleman, now absent, than whom no one is professionally or personally of higher standing in this community -Mr. Gregory Yale. I, also, was one of the number who wished to address the Board, and was refused.

I cite this case of "Limantour" only as an example. If the matter shall ever be strictly examined, it will be found that the various acts of Congress in relation to the claims to land in California, and the way that those acts have been administered, have had the effect, in a large degree, to substantiate what is false, and discredit what is true. Ten years ago, it would have been as feasible for a lawyer, who was instructed in the subject-matter, to detect a simulated grant here, as for a cashier of a bank to detect a false note, or a chemist a false coin; and this fact I have constantly stated, from 1849 upward, to the chief authorities concerned.

No. II.

SAN FRANCISCo, August 30, 1860.

The sinister and ill-omened communication made under date of 22d May last by Mr. Attorney General Black to the Presi dent, on the subject of titles and claims to lands in this State, has not received the attention, either from the legal profession or the public, that, from the official position, and consequent potency for mischief, of the functionaries concerned, it calls for. On its first appearance, I remarked, through the columns of the Alta, on a few of its pretensious absurdities; and hoped that

some other person of sufficient acquaintance with the subjectmatter, yet in whom its features might not have provoked so deep a disgust as they have in my mind, would have given to the public a complete exposition and castigation of the document. I have not had the satisfaction, however, to see any thing of the kind; and hence have determined that in a matter of so much public interest, and where I am so well acquainted with the facts, I am not at liberty to let truth and justice go entirely unvindicated, or to let official insolence and tergiversation, where circumstances so well enable me to administer punishment, go entirely unwhipt.

In this view, I intend to offer an exposition of at least some of the detestable points which Mr. Black's letter abounds in, and in which, he has tarnished the very name and style of his office, and committed himself and his Principal to a future at once indignant and contemptuous. This exposition will have its foundation in indisputable facts and proofs.

No. III.

SAN FRANCISCO, September 6, 1860.

After the publication of the foregoing note, I met with a very forcible and pungent criticism of Mr. Attorney General Black's "exploits" in the matter of our land titles, contained in the New York World of July 21st, and signed "An Early Californian." The writer of the piece understands the subject that he treats of, and applies the lash vigorously, and with skill. On one of the points which he touches, I adopt the estimates thus furnished to my hand, and which, examination will show, come almost mathematically to the truth.

The writer addressing the Attorney General, says:

"Your remarkable letter shows that you have expended nearly the whole of the $102,000 of appropriation given you for fighting fraudulent land claims.

*

*

*

“In order to persuade the President and Congress that this fund has been well employed, your letter expatiates upon the enormous value of the lands claimed under fraudulent grants in California, which you state

to be one hundred and fifty millions of dollars. This slap-dash amount has been paraded with excellent effect through Eastern newspapers, and has, doubtless, been believed upon your testimony. The total claimsgenuine, fraudulent, duplicates, and triplicates-presented in California, aggregated about twelve and a half millions of acres. Of these, onethird, as to area, were overlapping or duplicate claims, or claims of so vague a character as to have been either abandoned in, or hopelessly rejected by, the Land Commissioner's Court-leaving about eight and a half millions of acres as the quantity of land claimed in all California, under all sorts of grants, genuine or fraudulent, with which you could have anything to do. Of these from two-thirds to three-fourths were lands which were in the actual possession of the claimants, and had been before the conquest, which leaves about two and a half millions of acres as the quantity which could be claimed under fraudulent contested grants. The State of California contains 100,000,000 of acres; the one-fortieth of its area was, therefore fraudulently claimed. The total assessment roll of real and personal property in the State in 1859, was $132,000,000. If the whole State is estimated at $132,000,000 by persons employed for the purpose, on the spot, your estimate of $150,000,000 for the one-fortieth part of it must be a slight mistake. As you estimate, the whole State must be worth $6,000,000,000.

"In the same slap-dash manner, you state, after giving a long list of claims, 'that the value of any one of the defeated claims exceeds the whole appropriation, and some among them exceed it one hundred, or perhaps, one thousand fold. The appropriation was upwards of $100,000, consequently some of the claims defeated were worth, say ten or one hundred millions of dollars each!!”

The writer notes these items from the Attorney General's letter merely as "specimens" of its "reckless want of precision," justly remarking that though this "dashing mode of writing may attract the eyes of news readers," it damages the quality that, of all others, a state paper should possess-that of truth.

It falls to the duty of the present exposition to show that "reckless want of precision" and neglect and disregard of truth are the venial-nay, the innocent, parts of Mr. Attorney General's letter: absolute, reckless and malicious mendacity is its characteristic in its whole and in its details. It is alike false, vainglorious and malevolent in its intent, and in its pre

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »