Reports of cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of the State of Texas during a part of December term, 1849, at Austin and a part of Galveston Term, 1851. Volume 5. Page: 34
vii, 332 p. ; 22 cm.View a full description of this book.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
67-68 SUPPEME COURT.
McMullen v. Hodge.
Government of MIexico, proceeded to make an inventory of the mission property
and to sell the same. In this inventory no mention is made either of tlle
league of land near the mission or of the eleven leagues on the Medina. Tlis
property was sold by order of the Supreme Government of Mexico, andl the
funds renmaiLed subject to its disposition, having been sold in 1824. and( 1825.
In the year 1829 some twelve or fourteen persons petitonedl tile political chief
of the department of Bexar that the eleven leagues of land oll tile Medina and
one league near the mission of San Jose might be distributed to them as the
only surviving descendants of the mission of San Jose. This petition was referred
to thle ayuntamiento of Bexar, to ascertain whether the petitioners were
tlhe only descendants of the mission of San Jose, and to adopt such other incasures
in relation to the petition as they might deem proper. The names of
eilghteen descendants were reported, but no furtler action seems to have taken
place. By tlhe decree 177 of the Congress of Coalsnila and Texas tlhe Executive
of the State was authorized to alienate the lands belonging to the cxtilnguished
missions conformably to tle colonization laws. Immediately afterwards a
strong remonstrance was made by the people of the mission to the Govern ient,
through their political chief, inasmuch as it was npprelmended th ilt his decree
lathlorized the alienation of the house reserved for their pastor or curate. Tley
did not pretend to claim these lands at that time, but desired to be remittedl
front tlie obligation of paying to tle State for tlme mission property they lad
bought in 1824 and 1825. For the history of the missions, not sustained by the
decrees and ordinances to which we have referred, we beg leave to refer the
court to No. 50, vol 1 of tle missions near Bexar, in the land office, from page
1 to 160.
Ve have argued this question ns if we considered the dissolution of the corporation
of the mission of San Jose necessary to prevent the plaintiff from
recovering. Such, however, is not the case. 'The regulars, tlhe priests, tle
fathers, and [OS] the monks, tinder wlose control andl supervision these missionS
were, were tile visible representatives of the corporations, tle trustees of
the associated bodies. The Indians were no part'of tle corporate body thel ;
they were pupils, the beneficiaries, for whose welfare the corporate bodies or
fathers had associated themselves; the Indians tlad no voice il choosing tllem,
and language would have been as much misapplied in calling the Indians a
part of tle corporation of tlie mission of San Jose as it would be to call the students
of a college a part of the corporations. All tile property of tle missions
was, and must necessarily have been, held in trust by tie fathers.
,It seems to be admitted on the part of tle plaintiff that tle lands were
grantedd to a corporation, because if not granted to a corporation it was not
granted at all for the want of a grantee. But we differ as to the nature of tile
corporation. We say the grant was to tlhe mission of San Jose, for tle use and
benefit of tle Indians then in said mission, and those who might, be received
into the mission afterwards. T'ie application was in behalf of the mission
people by the president of the institution. In tle wliole proceedings it w\illlbe
perceived tllat the grant was asked for tlhe use and benefit of the institution,
and granted as asked. It is not true, as has been stated, that Pedro Ramirez,
the president of tle institution, ceased to act in the matter, and that the subject
was prosecuted by a lay member. Ramirez attended to the proceedings
before tlhe authorities in San Antonio, land when transferred to the vice royalty
of Mexico lie addressed . letter to *lis brother, Friar Roque Ximenes.
requesting himto give it his attention there, setting fortl tle great necessity
of the lands to>the mission people. The latter addressed the primitive judge
for the sale and composition of lands, and styles himself as acting "for the religoious
affairs of the holy evangelical mission of San Jose."
VI. But if it be contended, as it was in tle court below, that the grant was
made to tile Indians of San Jose, as tenants [09] in common or joint tenants,
34
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This book 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 Book.
Texas. Supreme Court. Reports of cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of the State of Texas during a part of December term, 1849, at Austin and a part of Galveston Term, 1851. Volume 5., book, 1883; St. Louis, Mo.. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth28569/m1/42/: accessed April 19, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; .