The Southwestern Historical Quarterly, Volume 30, July 1926 - April, 1927 Page: 91
330 p. : maps ; 23 cm.View a full description of this periodical.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
California and the Nation, 1846-1869
frequently done in order to take in a valuable portion of some
neighboring land on which, perhaps, improvements had been made
by some industrious settler who had, in good faith, located on a
tract of land which was supposed to be public domain. Many poor
settlers were thus mercilessly ejected without receiving any com-
pensation whatsoever for the valuable improvements they had
made.
With regard to the United States government, according to the
evidence available, it seems that it acted liberally with the Mexican
claimants. The courts declared that the act of March, 1851, should
be administered in a liberal spirit, and they even interpreted
liberally the provisions of the Mexican grants.13 It would have
been more expedient, perhaps, had the federal government con-
firmed all the small claims after a brief examination of their
titles, and submitted to the federal courts for a more thorough
inquiry the more questionable grants."
The vexatious question of the Mexican land claims was respon-
sible for many evils and was a disturbing factor in California for
over a decade and a half. It colored its social and political life,
and the story of its complications with the federal government
forms an important chapter in the history of the federal relations
of California.
Federal Land Grants to California: The second phase of the
California land question was the disposition of the public domain
within its limits. By the time California was acquired, the United
States government had already a well-defined land policy. This
consisted of liberal land grants to the new public land states for
the purpose of promoting education and internal improvements,
and the disposition of the rest of the public lands on very liberal
terms to settlers.
In view of its peculiar conditions, California expected an ex-
"See Van Reynegan v. Bolton, 5 Otto, 33-37; United States v. Moreno,
1 Wallace, 404; United States v. Johnson, 1 Wallace, 328-329; United
States v. Yorba, 1 Wallace, 412-423; Arguello et al. v. United States, 18
Howard, 539-553; Opinions of Attorney Generals, IX, 321. Justice Daniel,
of the United States Supreme Court, criticized the policy of the court as
"subversive alike of justice and of the rights and the policy of the United
States in the distribution and seating of the public lands,-of the welfare
of the people of California. . . ." (Arguello et al. v. United States, 18
Howard, 550-553.)
"4Henry George, "Our Land and Land Policy, National and State,"
Addresses, No. 7, pp. 14-17.
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Periodical.
Texas State Historical Association. The Southwestern Historical Quarterly, Volume 30, July 1926 - April, 1927, periodical, 1927; Austin, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth117142/m1/105/: accessed May 7, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Texas State Historical Association.