To
the Public
A
BRIEF DESCRIPTION
Of
The
TITLE
TO THE LANDS
Upon
Which
THE
CITY OF BROWNSVILLE
IS
SITUATED.
For several years past numerous articles have appeared
in various papers of this state, concerning the title to the land upon which
the city Brownsville is established. Many of these articles have been of an
abusive character, and put forth to prejudice the public mind against the
private claimants of this property. Up to this time we have not even replied to
them, relying wholly upon the courts of the country for a settlement of all
questions involved.
We learned, however, that these publications have
already created a popular impression abroad injurious to our rights; we
therefore publish this statement of the character of the Brownsville titles as
they actually exist.
In 1781. The crown of Spain granted the lands called
“El Espiritu Santo” to Don Salvador de la Garza, including the present site of
the city of Brownsville. The grantee, and those claiming under him, held actual
possession of this land from the time of the grant up to the present time; and
in 1852 the Legislature of Texas confirmed it. In fact, the validity of the title has never been
questioned.
In 1826 and 7 the State of Tamaulipas incorporated the
city of Matamoros, giving the corporation permission to take ejidos (4 square
leagues of land) for the use of the town. The Ayuntamiento were first instructed to
ascertain if the land about the town was public or private property. If it belonged to private owners, it was provided
that proper steps should be taken to expropriate
it in accordance with the provisions of the constitution of the state; and, in
the meantime, the city was authorized to use the lands, as in ordinary cases.
The investigation was made by the Ayuntamiento, and
their official report states that the land in question was owned by Dona
Francisca Cavasos, claimant under the Spanish grant. The 14th
article of the Constitution declared that no private property should be taken
for public purposes, without first
indemnifying the owner for the same; the price to be assessed by
arbitrators chosen for that purpose by the parties. The city, however,
proceeded to use the lands against the will of the owner, for labors and other
purposes. The public authorities failed to have the property appraised, in
accordance with the constitution, and no indemnity was ever made to the
acknowledged proprietor for the loss of the same. The whole proceeding
therefore was a lawless invasion of private rights.
A suit arose between the city and the owner which
continued until the year 1841; and, in fact, no final decision was made of the
subject matter in litigation up to the time of the [1848 Mexican War] treaty of
peace. During this period the labor-holders alternately paid rents to the
corporation and to the proprietor.
When the United States troops evacuated Matamoros in
1848, Charles Stillman, an American merchant then residing in that city, bought
out the possessory rights of several labor-holders for the purpose of
establishing his business on this side of the Rio Grande. Samuel A. Belden,
likewise a merchant of that place, was invited to join him; who did so and took
an interest in the property purchased. Shortly thereafter, others were attracted
to the spot and Messrs. Stillman and Belden were induced to lay off [out?] the
town of Brownsville. The population increased with extraordinary rapidity, and
in a few months numbered over two thousand.
About this time, Mr. David Snively, supposing that
there were no valid Spanish or Mexican grants in this part of the state,
located, in the District Surveyor’s Office at Corpus Christi, a league and a
labor of land. Including the town of Brownsville. Mr. Stillman, desirous to
avoid litigation, and to protect himself, Mr. Belden and others who had settled
under him, purchased these locations from Mr. Snively and had them duly
surveyed. These surveys and the head right certificates are now on file in the
General Land Office of this state.
In January, 1850, an act was passed by the Legislature
incorporating the city of Brownsville; the first section of which contained
this clause: That “all the right, title
and interest of the State of Texas in and to all the land included within said
tract, that was owned by the town of Matamoros, on the 19th day of
December, 1836, shall be and is hereby relinquished to the corporation of
Brownsville and their successors in office, in trust for the use and benefit of
said city, provided this act shall not impair private rights.” Thus
originated the city title, so called.
Sometime in December 1849, we purchased from Messrs.
Stillman & Belden their entire interest in the Brownsville property for the
sum of thirty-five thousand dollars.
In January, 1849, Rafael Garcia Cavazos, and wife,
claiming the land in question under the Spanish grant already mentioned,
through Dona Francisca Cavazos, instituted suit against Charles Stillman, S.A.
Belden, Jacob Mussina and others, in the United States District Court at
Galveston, for its recovery.
After a trial that continued for five weeks, the court
decided in favor of the plaintiffs, decreeing the Spanish grant valid; and
further that no expropriation of the land had been legally made by the City of
Matamoros, or State of Tamaulipas, or that the plaintiffs in the suit were the
owners of the land upon which the town of Brownsville is situated.
After the decision of the Cavazos case, in order to
secure ourselves from loss, and those who had purchased from us, we bought from
them [Rafael Garcia Cavazos and his wife] the land including the settled
portion of the town for the sum of thirty-three thousand dollars. We thus hold
the land by virtue of three distinct classes of titles, to wit; the Labor
Titles, Locations and Surveys, and by the Spanish Grant, confirmed by the
Legislature, and by the decree of the Federal Court.
As Jacob Mussina, of New Orleans, has set up some
claim of title to this property, and has published and circulated throughout
the State a petition which he has
filed against us in New Orleans, without annexing it to our answer to the same,
it is necessary that we should allude to his pretensions. In making this
publication, Mr. Mussina could have had but one object, and that was to
forestall public opinion in favor of himself.
In 1848, Simon Mussina, pretending to act as the agent
of his brother, Jacob Mussina, agreed with Charles Stillman to purchase
one-fourth part of his interest in the Brownsville property, and to pay
one-fourth part of the original cost and expenses of the same, which they were
to hold jointly and share the profits or losses in like proportions. When Mr.
Stillman was about leaving for the North, Simon Mussina presented to him and
Mr. Belden a written contract of partnership for signature, which also purported
to convey to Mussina one-fourth of the Brownsville property for the
consideration of one dollar. Upon
being asked to pay over his pro rata share of the costs and expenses of the
property, he stated that he had the money ready and he would pay it that day.
The contract of partnership was signed without
suspicion, and not one dollar was, or
has been, paid by Mussina to Stillman and Belden from that day to this, for the
interest he pretends to hold ____ _____. Simon Mussina has stated this fact
____ in New Orleans.
Some time in the month of November, 1849, Mr. Stillman
returning home from the North, found that Mussina had not only neglected to pay
the money due him, but that he had conveyed his interest in trust to M.
Bosiques, to secure to Mrs. Tarnava and others the payment of a debt of $28,000
which he owned for the purchase of the Point Isabel lands. Messrs. Stillman and
Belden at once notified Mr. Mussina that their contract of partnership was at
an end, and in a few days afterwards their sold their interest to us.
These are naked facts, and the public will determine
which of the parties to this transaction acted in bad faith.
The repeal of the act incorporating the City of
Brownsville has been the subject of much comment in some portions of the state;
and it is proper that we should here refer to this matter also. Up to the time
of the passage of this act, Brownsville was comparatively free from local
dissensions; but after the election of officers under the charter, the most
extraordinary measures were adopted.
An ordinance was passed to seize the ferries as public
property, while in the hands of individuals; and Mayor Bigelow, who vetoed the
resolution as an invasion of private rights, was forcibly ejected from office,
and another was elected in his place. These ferries, at this time, were worth
some five thousand dollars a year. Levee dues and other taxes were created without
the authority of law; and, finally, the city authorities organized themselves
into a court of justice to try land titles!
By virtue of a resolution to that effect, all persons
claiming lands within the city limits were required to submit their title
papers to the inspection of the city authorities, and to abide their judgment.
These and other similar acts of usurpation determined a majority of the
citizens holding property to attempt a repeal of the charter.
Judge Bigelow and others were elected members of the
Legislature. The petition and remonstrance with the documentary evidence were
laid before that body; and after a careful examination it was found that the
city had forfeited its charter, and that the Act of Incorporation ought to be
repealed. Accordingly, an act to that effect was passed, only six members of the Legislature voting against it.
By an Act approved February 7, 1853, the City of
Brownsville was again incorporated by the Legislature, and in accordance with
its provisions, officers were elected and a city government organized. But
strange as it may appear, the journals of the Senate and House show that the
law, as signed by the Governor, never
passed the Legislature! How this mistake
occurred we are not prepared to state. We trust, however, that the present
Legislature will give the matter a thorough investigation, and if they shall
find it to have been the result of fraud on the part of any person, that it
will be exposed, and the guilty party severely punished.
We have thus briefly explained the character of the
titles to the lands upon which the City of Brownsville is established; and we
lay this statement before the public as an act of self-defence, and generally
to disabuse the public mind in relation to this controversy. The final issue we
cheerfully leave to the judicial tribunals of the country to determine.
In Brownsville, the violence of party feeling having
in a great measure abated, the general desire of our citizens now is for the
speedy settlement of the litigation which has so injuriously affected the
increasing business and prosperity of our young but thriving city. And we trust
that the time is not far distant when the wishes of all in this respect shall
be realized.
E.
Basse
