I doubt James Reavis-Peralta (above) could have
imagined a worse person to review his new filing for the Peralta
grant than Royal A. Johnson. He was a lawyer, the son of a New York
lawyer, and never expressed an interest in politics. He had come west
out of curiosity, and stayed because he found a good job as a clerk
in the Arizona Territory Surveyor General's office. He'd been one of
the clerks who had received the original voluminous Perlata Grant
filing in 1883. And from that morning he'd been suspicious of Reevis.
Royal had risen to second in command of the office when his boss,
Joseph W. Robbins, had died, and was universally approved as
Robbins's replacement.
Then in 1884 Democrat Grover Cleveland
won the White House, and in the wholesale shifting of political
favors, Royal was replaced by the Democrat John Hise. Thus, when
Reavis-Peralta filed his new claim, it was John Hise who was to
pass judgment on the it. However, Hise was also suspicious of Reavis,
and delayed making his decision. Reavis appealed to Hises' boss,
looking to shake things up, but that failed. And then 1888 the
Republican Benjamin Harrison was elected President, and in July of
1889 Royal Johnson, the one man who knew as much about the Peralta
Grant as James Reavis-Peralta was back in as Surveyor General.
Even during his four years he was out
of office, Royal had continued to investigate the grant. So in
September, when the acting United States Commissioner of Land sent
Royal a letter asking, “"please report to me the exact
condition of said grant...and all the information you can obtain in
regard to it.", Royal was loaded and ready to fire. His
broadside landed on the public's desk on October 12th
(Columbus day), and the title said it all; “Adverse Report of the
Surveyor General of Arizona, Royal A. Johnson, upon the alleged
Peralta Grant”. The word “alleged” must have stung Reavis.
First, Johnson noted that the Royal
Cedula, the document which had supposedly started the entire
enterprise, was written in a form different than every other Royal
Cedula every issued, and in such bad Spanish that Royal suggested it
must have been written by an American using “bad California
Spanish”. In addition the seal on the Royal Cedula had been
printed on the page, and not impressed into it, as it was in every
other Credula. Finally, the signatures had been made with a steel
pen, not invented until a century after 1748.
Considering the report of the Mexican
Holy Inquisition, Royal observed that the seal was legitimate, but it
had been glued on the page and not impressed, and it was cracked and
had a brown tinge, suggesting it had been heated and removed from
another document. And when discussing the Viceroy's decree directly
awarding the grant, Royal wrote, “No certificate of a modern date
nor any other reliable certification appears on the copies which
would point to the originals being at present in the custody of some
custodian of archives where they could be readily located and
seen...to enable me to ascertain the whereabouts of originals or to
prove their existence, and if they were to be obtained it is the duty
of the claimants to produce them or to obtain and submit undoubted
proof of their existence in their proper archives ... .”
In fact, at times the Surveyor General
seemed to be scolding Reavis. “...it seems in poor taste that the
old books of the San Xavier Mission, wherein were recorded the
births, marriages and deaths of persons under the cognizance of the
Church, should be selected to have inserted and rudely inserted among
its withered leaves a copy of the grant of Peralta by the viceroy,
and a copy of Peralta’s will. It must be borne in mind that these
books have been out of the custody of the Church for many years, and
that we know very little as to their history in that time. The
photographs produced show that what appears to be the regular pages
of the old book bear every indication of age...with the exception of
the very sheet that the claimant Reavis relies so much on...In the
first place, the sheet is pasted in at right angles to the other
sheets and is one-third larger than the regular sheets. The upper end
of the pasted in sheet is inserted in that part of the binding that
holds the back of the large book together instead of being in regular
order...”
It was clear that Royal had made a
detailed study of this subject. He noted that under the laws existing
the 16th century, the King would not have communicated to
the Viceroy of New Spain, but rather through the bureaucracy, the
Council of the Indies, who would have then contacted the Viceroy. And
there was no copy of the Peralta Grant in the Council's archives.
And, asked Johnson, why was there no record or even mention of the
noble deeds achieved by Maguel Peralta anywhere in any records? Given
that this was the largest individual land grant made in the Americas
by the Spanish crown, should not the achievement equal its reward?
And, noted Johnson, Spanish law required, “No memorial from any
person whatever shall be received for services which shall not be
supported by certificates from viceroys, Generals, or other chiefs
under whom such services shall have been performed, except those
persons who shall have served in the councils.” And, again, the
Council of the Indies had no record of the Peralta grant.
Royal also noted that although the
Inquisition was extremely powerful in Mexico, no obsessive Spanish
bureaucrat – and any good bureaucrat is obsessive - would have
asked that body to investigate the Peralta Grant. It should have been
reviewed by the Audiencia Guadalajara Nuev Galidia. And in their
records there was no mention of the Peralta Grant. Then, Royal
Johnson dealt with the conflicts between the 1883 and 1887 claims.
Noted the Surveyor General, if the 1864 Willing bill of sale was
legitimate, then that superseded Sophia's inheritance. And as to the
photograph of Sophia standing next to the “Inicial Monument” (above),
Johnson showed that the Peralta family crest carved into the rock was, in reality, Indian
holography.
The report went on to detail the
vagueness of the boundaries of the claim, pointing out that under
long established property law, you cannot claim what you cannot
locate. “Speedy and final action should be had on this base claim
in order that the people of this territory may enjoy their homes with
peace of mind. And parties guilty of forgery or the fabrication of
papers that have caused so much trouble should be vigorously
prosecuted by the government and that without delay. I recommend that
the alleged grant should not be confirmed as it is prayed for, it
being to my mind without the slightest foundation in fact and utterly
void.”
The Baron of Arizona, James
Reavis-Peralta, responded as any good con man would respond when he was caught red handed. He sued
the United States government for $11 million.
- 30 -
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please share your reaction.