San Benito County History

This section is excerpted from A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California by Henry D. Barrows and Luther A. Ingersoll, and published by The Lewis Publishing Company in 1893.

Return to Index

Cause Celebre. -- "Panoche Grande."

The history of this case, which has been before Congress or the courts now for almost forty years, is one of the most remarkable in the annals of this country. The report of the committee on public lands of the forty-fifth Congress, dated June 13, 1878, makes the startling statement that although the claimant of this grant had succeeded in obtaining two distinct judicial confirmations of his title to this ranche; and that two Secretaries of the Interior, to-wit, Hon. Caleb B. Smith, on the 29th of December, 1862, and Hon. J. P. Usher, on the 4th of March, 1864, ordered patents to issue to said claimant; and further, that although the President of the United States, Abraham Lincoln, after investigation, decided that the grant was genuine, and ordered a patent to issue therefor; and a patent was actually made out and signed,.March 14, 1863, in due form, granting to Vicente P. Gomez, and to his heirs and assigns, the said rancho Panoche Grande; yet in spite of all these facts, the claimant, William McGarrahan, successor in interest of the grantee, Vicente P. Gomez, has never yet received a patent for the same, as ordered by the two Secretaries of the Interior, and finally by the President of the United States himself!

What is the sinister agency which baffles and persistently and repeatedly paralyzes the power and lawful acts of the courts and executive officers of this great government? Can there be any other cause than that rich quicksilver mines have been discovered on the rancho; and that from the enormous product of these mines, the beneficiaries have been able to fight the rightful owners and legal confirmees for more than thirty years, and to practically defy the Government of the United States? Is it creditable to the people of this country that such things can happen as are revealed in the record of this case?

What does that record show?

(1) That Governor Micheltorena in 1844 granted to Vicente P. Gomez, a tract of land, containing four leagues of land, known as the rancho "Panoche Grande," located in what is now known as San Benito county, California.

(2) On the 5th day of June, 1857, the United States District Court for the Southern District of California rendered a decision on an appeal from the United States Land Commission, confirming the claim of said Gomez to said rancho. On the 22nd of December, 1857, William McGarrahan purchased the land of Gomez for a valuable consideration. The decree of June 5, 1857, not having been signed and entered at the time, a decree nunc pro tunc was entered on the 5th day of February, 1858, covering four leagues, which was duly signed by the district judge, I. S. K. Ogier.

On the 15th day of March, 1858, the United States appealed from the decree of the district court, as was their practice in all such cases.

On the 31st of January, 1859, the appeal was finally dismissed, on motion of the attorney general, and an order to that effect was entered upon the records of the United States Supreme Court; and in March, 1859, the supreme court issued its mandate remanding the cause to the court below for such proceedings as ought to be had, in accordance with the decree of the district court confirming the grant, notwithstanding the said appeal.

The mandate of the supreme court was filed in the district court below on the 4th day of May, 1859, whereupon the district court ordered adjudged and decreed that the said mandate be carried into effect and that the said Gomez proceed under the decree of the district court theretofore rendered, as under a final decree.

(3) At the December term, 1859, of the supreme court, on motion of the attorney general, the order previously made dismissing the appeal was vacated and the mandate was recalled. The effect of this action of the court was to leave the New Idria Mining Company, who, in realty were merely a band of "squatters" on the rancho, in the possession of the quicksilver mines (then valued at $10,000,000) on the lands, and to take from the confirmee the means of the expulsion of that company from the premises. No appeal appears to have been taken subsequently until the 25th day of August, 1862, when an eceparte order of appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States was obtained from the district court.

On the 4th day of December, 1862, on a submission of the facts under which it was obtained being presented, the District Court Fletcher M. Haight, judge, vacated the appeal and set aside the order allowing the same, and denied the motion of the United States district attorney for leave to make an appeal.

The effect of this denial of an appeal, says the report of the committee on public lands, was a final confirmation of the grant.

(4) On application for an official survey of the rancho, under the act of June 2, 1862, the United States Surveyor-general for California proceeded to make such survey, and reported the same to the Interior Department according to law, on the 11th day of September, 1862. On the 29th of December, 1862, the Secretary of the Interior, Caleb B. Smith, rendered this opinion in the case, which was, "that the decree of the District Court for the Southern District of California, confirming the grant bad become final. The United States had no longer any interest in the controversy. No claim of third parties had been interposed;" and thereupon he directed the Commissioner of the General Land Office "to issue a patent for the land in accordance with the survey as reported by the surveyor-general." The order of the secretary was not complied with for some reason, before the expiration of his term of office, which was only a few days subsequent to the rendition of his decision. The matter was brought before

Secretary Smith's successor, Hon. J. P. Usher, who rendered his opinion March 4, 1863, in which, after referring to the question decided by Mr. Smith, he said: "I think, therefore, that the decision of my predecessor directing the patent was correct, and that it should issue."

In obedience to the decision of Secretary Usher, a patent was executed to said Gomez and his assigns for the four leagues of land, in accordance with the survey, as reported by the United States surveyor-general for California.

A record of a patent duly signed by the president, by his secretary to sign land patents with the seal of the general land office affixed is found in the office of the commissioner of the general land office, on pages 312 to 321, inclusive, of Volume IV. of Confirmed California Mexican Land Grants.

Although the Supreme Court of the United States, subsequent to the rendition of the decisions of Secretaries Smith and Usher, decided against the validity of the grant of than Gomez; yet it was not till more four years after the decision of the court that the record of the fact that a patent had been issued was discovered and brought to the knowledge of the court.

(5) The public land committee of the house of representatives assert (pp. 11-12 of report) that all the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States on this claim adverse to the grantee, have been founded on ex-parte affidavits and statements, and statements of at least doubtful veracity, and which are decisively disproved by documentary and record evidence of an official and judicial character, and that in the opinion of the committee the court was deceived and misled by such affidavits and statements. This, the committee say, was so evident to the House of the Forty-first Congress, when this case was before it for examination, that it adopted a resolution directing that all such decisions made since the execution of the [pate no only those decisions affect the validity of title] should be disregarded in the settlement of this controversy. And the house resolution directed the president of the United States to finally decide and dispose of the memorialists claim as might "in his judgment be just and equitable, without regard to any action or proceedings had subsequent to the 14th day of March, 1863, the date of the patent recorded."

The House committee on public lands (Forty-fifth Congress, second session), from whose report the foregoing facts are derived, also reproduces in extenso the reports of the House judiciary committees of the Fortieth and Forty-first Congresses on this case, both favorable to the grantee, together with the adoption by the House in each case of the bill offered by said committees "for the relief of William McGarrahan."

A synopsis of the evidence, or of its principal points, cited by the House committee, proving the existence and loss of the grant, is appended here as a part of the history of the case, and also because of the local historical incidents therein brought out.

James L. Ord testified before the land commission, February 12, 1853, that he was assistant surgeon of Company F, of the Third Regiment, U. S. Artillery, in January, 1847, at Monterey; that he occupied a portion of the custom house at Monterey with General W. T. Sherman (then captain) as quarters, another portion being occupied as a hospital under charge of witness; that the center of the building was used as a depository for naval stores; that in the room occupied as a hospital were Spanish papers which he supposed were old customhouse papers of no value, which were on shelves with doors, but were not locked; that the papers were not in charge of any one; and that some of them were used by him in putting up prescriptions for the sick; that witness did not understand the Spanish language, and that it was one or two months before he found out that they were of any value from seeing the papers in the hands of Captain Halleck; that witness thinks some of the papers were expedients; that he does not recollect seeing maps in the papers, and that he cannot form an idea of the quantity of papers used; that some of them had numbers on the outside; that from January until May the papers were in such exposed condition; that witness left Monterey about the first of May and returned in June, when the papers were not in the place in which he left them; that he thinks Captain Halleck took charge of them when they were removed from the customhouse.

José Castro testified February 24, 1853, that he was a resident of Monterey and was then forty-four years of age; that he knew Vicente Gomez, who was a Mexican by birth, and who had lived in California since 1832; that some time in 1844, on Gomez asking his advice as to where public land could be petitioned for, witness recommended the place called the Panoche Grande, east of San Juan Bautista about twenty-five leagues, for which Gomez received a concession from Governor Micheltorena; that the map shown witness and filed with his testimony, is a correct delineation in the general outlines of said tract; that Gomez was a clerk in the commissary department at Monterey from some time in 1846, to the change of government. The witness testified that he knew the place well from personal observation, having camped upon it fifteen or twenty days while engaged in military service against the Indians; that he knew nothing on the matters of Gomez' occupation or visits to the place, as he had seen him only once after having recommended him to apply for land; that witness had filled the offices of political chief of California, and a member of the Territorial Diputacion; lie had also been prefect, and commandante general.

The next witness, José Abrego, who was examined October 27, 1853, testified through an interpreter that he was forty years of age and had lived in Monterey twenty years; that Gomez showed him a title or grant of the land called La Panoche Grande, near the rancho of San Luis Gonzaga, belonging to Francisco Pacheco, issued by Micheltorena in 1844 or 1843; that Gomez was at that time clerk in the office of the commissaries general of California, of which witness was the chief; that after that Gomez placed the same for safe keeping among the papers belonging to the archives of said office, where it remained until said archives were taken possession of by the American forces, July 7, 1846; that witness was at the head of the commissary's office until that time, and Gomez remained as a clerk until then; that. the title was signed by Micheltorena and Jimeno, governor and secretary, and bore their true and genuine signatures; that he did not know the data of the grant; that it was for four leagues; that he had seen a plat of the law and read it, but did not recollect the boundaries; that the plat annexed to Castro's testimony witness had seen before, at the same time he saw the title papers in the hands of Gomez; that it was drawn no the same kind of paper that he had in his office.

In reply to questions by the United States law agent, witness said that Gomez was in his office for about two years; that the grant was issued at Monterey; that Micheltorena left Monterey for Los Angeles in February or March, 1845, and did not return until the occupation of the country by the United States; that Gomez joined General José Castro at the time Colonel Frémont appeared at Monterey about May, 1846; that witness frequently gave Gomez leave of absence for twenty days or a month; that he "was employed in the office of witness, but had to go to the office of the Secretary of State, when called upon to assist in that office.

In reply to questions by petitioner's attorney, witness testified that at nine o'clock in the morning of July 7, 1846, the American troops took possession of all the archives of the government, which were in the various public buildings at Monterey, and carried them in blankets to the customhouse buildings, where there were about 400 men under Colonel Frémont, and where many of the papers constituting the public archives were torn up and destroyed; that from that time the archives remained in possession of the American authorities, and witness did not know what became of them; that the papers which were destroyed were torn up and scattered about the streets and lost; that witness called upon Mr. Hartnell and requested him to remonstrate with Lieutenant Maddox, who was in command, to prevent further destruction of the papers.

A master of a whaling ship, testified before the land commission, that he was in Monterey in the fall of 1845, and was intimate with the family of Gomez, who offered to sell him three or four leagues of land, and showed him papers which he said were a title to the land from Micheltorena; that Gomez proposed at that time returning to Mexico; that witness then understood the Spanish language.

Gomez, in his petition to the United States Land Commission, filed February 9, 1853, recites amongst other things that the lands for which lie asks confirmation, called Panoche Grande, of the extent of four leagues, (now lying in the county of San Joaquin), are bounded on the south by the lands of Francisco Arias; on the north by the lands of Julian Ursua and the low hills; and on the west by the barren hills, as explained by the map of thereto annexed. He alleges that for some time before the military occupation of Monterey, California, by the American forces, July 7, 1846, he was a clerk in the Commissary's office of Monterey, and that at that time he had his original title-papers for said tract of land deposited in his desk in said office of the Commissary; that shortly before the naval forces of the United States took possession of the town of Monterey, he had left the town with some of the Mexican troops to assist in the defense of the country; that when he so left Monterey he left his said original grant of said land in his desk at the office of the Commissary as aforesaid, believing it to be a secure place; that upon his return to Monterey he found it in possession of the United States troops, and the public buildings, offices, and papers were all in possession of and guarded by American soldiers; that he made application without delay to the American officer in charge of the office and papers where his said original title for said tract of land was deposited, but the said officer (Lieutenant Maddox, of the United States Marine troops) refused to deliver any paper or papers then in his possession or under his charge.

He further alleges that the map presented with his petition is the map which accompanied the original expedient, and that the grant made by Governor Micheltorena was the land delineated by this map.

Gomez further avers that he became possessed of this map by permission of the proper officers, for the purpose of having a copy made for his use and benefit; and he had taken it to his present dwelling-house a short time before California fell into the hands of the American authorities. It had remained in his possession ever since. He has made application, he says, to the person in charge of archives of the former government, which were taken at Monterey for information in relation to this grant, and title made to him, but it could not be found; nor was the original expediente found. Gomez concludes his petition to the Land Commission in these words: "Your petitioner has heard, and believes and alleges, that many original papers and documents belonging to the government archives taken at Monterey on July 7, 1846, have been since lost or destroyed. If such be the fact, his title papers and the expediente must have been among the papers and documents so lost and destroyed. Your petitioner hopes that, after such proof as the nature of the case will admit, your honorable board will confirm his said claim to the said four leagues of land granted as aforesaid, and that he may have a decree accordingly, and general relief, as in duty bound."

In the Panoche Grande case, all the evidence, as collated by the House land committee, both oral and documentary, as in the case of all the other confirmed Mexican grants, strongly indicates the genuineness of this grant; and there is abundant warrant for the dictum, of old settlers in San Benito and Monterey counties, that the title of the grantee would never have been contested, had there never been discovered on it quicksilver mines. But this belief of laymen, in the equities of the grantees of this rancho, which have been fought with desperate persistence and cunning by a band of squatters for thirty-five years, is fortified by the decisions of two United States district judges, two secretaries of the interior, and lastly by an illustrious president of the United States, all of whom were known as honest conscientious and enlightened men and officers, who sought, moreover, in faithfully performing their official duties in connection with this remarkable case, to carry out their convictions -- which, nevertheless, have not been realized, even to this day! How can American citizens study the long tortuous history of the fight which has been made in the courts, in Congress and before the various executive departments of the Government, including at least three presidents of the United States, against the final confirmation of title to the bona-fide grantees of "Panoche Grande," without having their self-respect, their amor propria, seriously wounded. The scandals connected with this case have become intolerable to the moral sense of the American people.

Return to Index

This section is excerpted from A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California by Henry D. Barrows and Luther A. Ingersoll, and published by The Lewis Publishing Company in 1893.