H'FADDEN vraosmsou. 11
Spanish grants; one for the Santa Ana rancho, and the other for the
Las Bolsas rancho. A
The petition for removal states as follows: That the action arises
under the act of March 3, 1851, and under the treaty of Guadalupe
Hidalgo; that the claim of plaintiff is based on a right and title
which originated under Spain, while California was a province of
Spain, and also upon an cxpedientc made by the authorities of Mex-
ico while California was a part of the domain of the republic of
Mexico; that the grant was presented by Bernardo Yorba to the
tribunals of the United States for conhrmation, under the act of '
1851; that the claim was subsequently confirmed, and a patent is-
sued upon the confirmation, December 21, 1883; that thepatent in-
cludes all the land in controversy; that the complainants have ac- .
quired, and they now hold, all the title to the land in controversy
which passed by said Spanish and Mexican titles, and said patent,
and that they now claim the same under said title and under no other
title; that the defendants are owners in fee of the lands in contro-
versy; that their rights arise under a title granted by Spain, and a
further grant by Mexico, while California was still a part of the do-
main of those countries, respectively; that the title is other and dif- `
ferent from that held by complainants; that the title was held in
1852 by Ramon Yorba et at.; that in that year it was presented to
the board of land commissioners for confirmation, and was afterwards
finally conhrmed; that patents thereto were issued as follows: For
one undivided half to Ramon Yorba et al., on June 9, 1874, and the
other half to Justo Murillo et al., August 27, 1877 ; that defendants
hold all the title passing by both these last-named patents, and they
4 hold no other title; and that the matter in dispute depends upon,
and will be determined by, the weight and force in law of the respect-
ive patents, and titles therefrom derived, held, as aforesaid, by com-
plainants and defendants. _
The case as stated in the petition for removal, in my judgment,
does not appear to present any disputed question of law arising under
the constitution or laws of the United States. S0 far as appears,
neither party questions the right of the Spanish and Mexican govern-
ments to make either grant,—either the grant under which the com-
plainants claim, or that under which the defendants claim. Neither N
party appears to question the right of the grantees of either grant to
the protection accorded by the treaty. Both parties rely upon the `
binding and obligatory force and effect of the treaty. Neither party
denies the validitycof the act of March 8, 1851. Neither party de-
nies to the other any right claimed under that act. `Neither party
gives a different construction to the act, or any of its provisions, from
that claimed by the other. Neither party denies the validity of the
proceedings of the other for a confirmation of the title under which
they claim; nor the correctness of the survey; nor of the patent.
In respect to the above matters, there does not appear to be any