Where there were two separate claimants of land in California,
both claiming under one original grant, and the surveyor, in
running out their lines, disregarded the limits of the original
grant and included within one of the surveys a large portion of
government land, the Commissioner of the General Land Office was
right in refusing to issue a patent founded on such erroneous
survey.
This was a petition to the circuit court for a mandamus to
Hendricks commanding him to prepare a patent for some land in
California; secondly, to cause said patent, when ready for the
requisite signatures of the appropriate officers, to be presented
to the recorder of the land office and the President of the United
States, or other proper officers of the government, for their
respective signatures; thirdly, to deliver the patent so prepared
and duly subscribed to the petitioner.
A rule was laid upon the commissioner to show cause why a
mandamus should not issue as prayed. On the 10th of June, 1858, he
filed his answer and exhibits. Whereupon the court adjudged that
the cause shown was sufficient, and dismissed the petition. The
petitioner appealed to this Court.
Page 64 U. S. 439
In 1839, there was a grant of land to Antonio Buelna of the
extent of four square leagues, a little more or less. In 1849, the
widow of Buelna and her then husband sold to Castro one league of
land in the location known by the name of San Gregorio, situated on
the coast to the north of Santa Cruz, and which land, consisting of
four leagues, was the property of Antonio Buelna.
In 1852, another deed was made for more definite boundaries,
which contained certain courses and distances. Three leagues of
this land were confirmed to the widow of Buelna, then Madame
Rodrigues, and surveyed for her, giving her that quantity. About
this there was no controversy.
Castro petitioned for his confirmation, and in January, 1856,
the district court decreed in his favor, referring to the
description substantially the same as that contained in the second
deed, above mentioned, adding these words:
"The tract hereby confirmed, containing by estimation one square
league, and being the same land described in the conveyance to
claimant, filed before said board, and constituting a part of the
record in this cause."
After the confirmation, a survey was made on behalf of the
petitioner, under the authority of the Surveyor General of
California, who signed it on the 19th of November, 1857. Being
approved by him, it was returned to the General Land Office.
The commissioner examined the survey in connection with the
grant to Buelna, the two deeds, and the decree of confirmation, and
came to the conclusion that the lines of the survey ran out of the
grant to Buelna into the government land, and gave to Castro two
leagues and a half more land than he ought to have, the surplus
being taken from the lands of the United States.
On the 3d of February, 1858, the Commissioner signed, with a
view to transmission, instructions to the Surveyor General to the
effect that he should cause a further and careful examination to be
made in the whole matter, and report the result, with his decision
as to the true boundaries of the league confirmed to Castro, and
the three leagues to Madame Rodrigues.
Page 64 U. S. 440
The petitioner appealed to the Secretary of the Interior, who
affirmed the decision of the Commissioner of the Land Office, who
refused to issue a patent founded upon what he considered to be an
erroneous survey.
In May, 1858, the petitioner applied to the circuit court for a
mandamus, as before stated.
MR. JUSTICE CAMPBELL delivered the opinion of the Court.
The appellant petitioned the circuit court for a writ of
mandamus, to be directed to the Hon. Thomas A. Hendricks,
Commissioner of the Land Office, commanding him to prepare and
provide a patent to the appellant for a parcel of land in
California which had been confirmed to him by the decree of the
District Court for the Northern District of California, and is
described in a survey approved by the Surveyor General of that
state.
It appears from the petition and answer and the papers filed in
the circuit court and forming a part of the record that in the year
1839, the Governor of California granted to Antonio Buelna a tract
of land known as San Gregorio, of the extent of four square
leagues, a little more or less, as is shown in the sketch attached
to the expediente. In 1849, the representatives of Buelna (his
widow and her husband) sold to the appellant one league of land in
the location of San Gregorio, and in 1852 they executed a deed
conveying the same land, by the description of
"one league of land in the place known by the name of San
Gregorio, on the coast north of Santa Cruz, being part of a tract
of land of four leagues, granted by the government to Antonio
Buelna, and the same is declared to be situate and bounded as
follows, and containing one league, more or less: commencing at a
stake marked A, in the Canada de los Tunis, where the Arroyo de los
Tunis comes out of the mountains; thence running southerly with the
ridge of the mountains to the stake marked B, in the Arroyo
Page 64 U. S. 441
Hondo; thence following said Arroyo Hondo until it meets the
Arroyo de San Gregorio; thence, following the Arroyo de San
Gregorio, to a stake marked C on a white rock in the mountain,
situate on the west side of said arroyo; thence northwardly, about
two miles, to a high conical peak of the mountain, on which is
placed stake marked D; thence easterly to the place of
beginning."
Separate claims were presented by the widow of Buelna and
Salvador Castro for their respective portions of the rancho San
Gregorio, and separate decrees of confirmation were made in the
district court. The decree in favor of Madame Buelna is for three
square leagues of the land within the boundaries described in the
plan attached to the expediente and referred to in the original
grant, copies of which are on file in the cause. Salvador Castro
was confirmed to the tract of land described in the deed by the
metes and bounds before mentioned, with the addition,
"being portion of the four leagues granted April 16, 1839, by J.
B. Alvarado to Antonio Buelna, and known as San Gregorio, the tract
hereby confirmed containing, by estimate, one square league, and
being the same land described in the conveyance to the
claimant."
The two decrees were communicated to the Surveyor General of
California in 1857, and his returns are filed as testimony in the
cause. He has laid off to Madame Buelna the three square leagues
confirmed to her, and has surveyed for the appellant a tract within
the specific calls of the deed and decree of fifteen thousand seven
hundred and 54/100 acres. It is apparent from this statement that
the Surveyor General has entirely disregarded the limits of the
rancho San Gregorio and the restrictions as to quantity in the
grant of Alvarado, Governor of California, of April, 1839. But
these, for the object before the Court, were the controlling calls
in the deed, as well as in the decree. The primary object of the
act, "To ascertain and settle the private land claims in the State
of California," approved 3 March, 1851, was to distinguish the
vacant and public lands from those that were private property, and
for this purpose an inquiry into preexisting titles became
necessary. To accomplish this, every person claiming lands
Page 64 U. S. 442
in California by virtue of any right or title derived from the
Spanish or Mexican government, was required to present the same to
a board of commissioners. The mesne conveyances were also required,
but not for any aim of submitting their operation and validity to
the board, but simply to enable the board to determine if there was
a
bona fide claimant before it under a Mexican grant, and
so this Court has repeatedly declared that the government had no
interest in the contests between persons claiming
ex post
facto the grant.
United States v.
Sutter, 21 How. 170.
The authentic evidence of what is private property is to be
found in the grants of the government of California, and not in the
mesne conveyances. Nor is this government charged to decide between
claimants in the condition of those interested in the rancho San
Gregorio. It was entirely competent for the district court to
connect the claims arising under the same grant, and it will be its
duty, in superintending the execution of the decrees of that court
in such cases, to look to the evidence furnished by the grant
itself as overruling in determining questions of boundary and
location.
In the case of the
United States v.
Fossatt, 21 How. 445, this Court had occasion to
refer to the limits of the authority of the courts of the United
States under the Act of 3 March, 1851, before cited. We stated in
that case that if questions of a judicial nature arose in the
settlement of the location and boundary of the grants confirmed to
individuals, the district court was empowered to settle those
questions upon a proper case being submitted to it before the issue
of the patent, and in such a case the judgment may properly extend
to the confirmation of the survey and an order for a patent to
issue. But it was not the expectation of this Court that the
Surveyor General should make returns to the district court in every
case, nor did they imply that the validity of a survey depended on
the recognition of that court, or its incorporation into a decree
of the court. The Surveyor General of California was charged with
the duty to cause all private claims which shall be finally
confirmed to be accurately surveyed, and to furnish plats for the
same, and in the location
Page 64 U. S. 443
of the said claims, he was invested with such power and
authority as are conferred on the register of the land office and
receiver of the public moneys of Louisiana, in the sixth section of
the "act to create the office of surveyor of the public lands for
the State of Louisiana," approved 3 March, 1831. 4 Stat. 492. Under
this act, the Surveyor General exercises a
quasi-judicial
power, and the claimant, with an authentic certificate of the
decree of confirmation and a plat or survey of the land, duly
certified and approved by the Surveyor General, is entitled to a
patent. But then the Commissioner of the Land Office, by virtue of
enabling acts of Congress, exercises a supervision and control over
the acts of the subordinate officers charged with making surveys,
and it is his duty to see that the location and survey made by that
officer under the decree of the court, and which has not had the
final sanction of the judicial tribunals, is in accordance with the
decree. The refusal of the Commissioner of the Land Office to issue
a patent upon this survey was an appropriate exercise of the
functions of his office, and the decree of the circuit court
refusing a mandamus is
Affirmed with costs.
