Summary

Portrait of Melville Fuller Melville Fuller Chaves v. United States — Opinion of the Court

It is true that when Armenta gave juridical possession under the grant of 1788, he described the south boundary as 'the junction of the rivers, and also a point of a red table-land and lands of said Indians.' But at that time the Indians claimed to the junction of the two rivers, and no attempt was then made by Armenta to determine the boundary of the pueblo, as it would seem would have been the case if the grant had been of land for settlement with the intention of acquiring the legal title.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Melville Fuller Melville Fuller Chaves v. United States — Opinion of the Court

We pray your excellency to be pleased to grant this aid and settlement that we petition for to the persons herein mentioned; being pleased at the same time to order, in the name of his majesty (whom may God preserve) , that we may receive from the boundaries beyond the land granted to the Indians of the pueblo, our petition calling for from east to west to the middle arroyo called 'Los Torreones,' and the line running from north to south to the Vallecelo de la Cueva which is in front of the waterfall, and in a tranverse line from said middle arroyo to the Rito de la Jara.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Melville Fuller Melville Fuller Chaves v. United States — Opinion of the Court

The language of the petition and decree of 1788 was, perhaps, somewhat peculiar, and it is manifest that Governor Chacon regarded 'the cultivation and working of the land' by them as not permanent in character, for, when the petition for the grant of 1798 was presented to him on behalf of the two Garcias and eighteen others, he referred in his decree to the interpreters as 'temporarily stationed' on the tract solicited, and must be assumed to have been aware of the nature of their occupation.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature