Tameling v. United States Freehold and Emigration Company

Decision Date01 October 1876
Citation93 U.S. 644,23 L.Ed. 998
PartiesTAMELING v. UNITED STATES FREEHOLD AND EMIGRATION COMPANY
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

'The justice of the peace to whose jurisdiction belongs the land petitioned for, which, I believe, should be the third demarcation, having before him the superior decree of the most excellent governor of the 30th of December last, will proceed to the land and place the petitioners in possession, provided it is not to the injury of third parties.

'ARCHULETA. [RUBRIC.]'

'TO DON MIGUEL SANCHEZ, Justice of the Peace of the Third Demarcation:——

'The undersigned, Mexican citizens and residents of this precinct, in the most approved anner provided by law, appear before you, and state that the public land contained in the foregoing statement having been granted to us by the government of the department, as will be seen by the superior decree entered on the margin, and lacking the certificate of possession which will insure to us our legal title thereto, and prevent any one from disturbing us, we pray you to consider us as having presented ourselves, after which we will enlarge this for such ends as our rights may require. Therefore, we pray you to grant our request, justice being what we ask for. We swear that it is not done in malice, and in whatever may be necessary, &c.

'LOUIS LEE.

'...

To continue reading

Request your trial
46 cases
  • O'DONNELL v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • June 7, 1937
    ...such action of Congress could be held to be not binding on the ground of the exception herein proposed. Tameling v. United States Freehold, etc., Co., 93 U.S. 644, 662, 23 L.Ed. 998; Astiazaran v. Santa Rita Mining Co., supra. It is difficult to see how a decree of the commission, acting on......
  • Cartwright v. Public Service Co. of N.M., 6172
    • United States
    • New Mexico Supreme Court
    • December 12, 1958
    ...of the Mexican title by Congress. On the effect of such confirmation, the Supreme Court of United States in Tameling v. U. S. Freehold & Emigration Co., 93 U.S. 644, 23 L.Ed. 998, dealing with a Mexican land grant, 'This was a matter for the consideration of Congress and we deem ourselves c......
  • American Water Development, Inc. v. City of Alamosa, s. 92SA141
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court
    • May 9, 1994
    ...Congress. See United States v. Sandoval, 167 U.S. 278, 290, 17 S.Ct. 868, 872-73, 42 L.Ed. 168 (1897); Tameling v. U.S. Freehold & Emigration Co., 93 U.S. 644, 661, 23 L.Ed. 998 (1876); Sanchez v. Taylor, 377 F.2d 733, 737 (10th Cir.1967). What followed is detailed in Shaw v. Kellogg, 170 U......
  • Ex parte Bakelite Corporation. riginal
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • May 20, 1929
    ...States, 202 U. S. 401, 407, 408, 26 S. Ct. 685, 50 L. Ed. 1079. 17 Act March 3, 1891, c. 539, 26 Stat. 854. 18 Tameling v. U. S. Freehold Co., 93 U. S. 644, 662-663, 23 L. Ed. 998; Astiazaran v. Santa Rita Land & Mining Co., 148 U. S. 80, 81-82, 13 S. Ct. 457, 37 L. Ed. 376. 19 Grisar v. Mc......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Chapter 1 - § 1.1 • MEXICAN GRANTS
    • United States
    • Colorado Bar Association Colorado Real Property Law (CBA) Chapter 1 Origin of Colorado Titles
    • Invalid date
    ...922.[3] 9 Stat. 926.[4] Id. at 929.[5] Act of July 22, 1854, ch. 103, § 8, 10 Stat. 309. [6] Tameling v. U.S. Freehold & Emigration Co., 93 U.S. 644 (1876) (Sangre de Cristo grant); Flores v. Bruesselbach, 149 F.2d 616 (10th Cir. 1945) (Tierra Amarilla grant); Martinez v. Rivera, 196 F.2d 1......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT