... r
1
BEFORE THE INDIAN CLAIMS COMMISSION
PUEBLO OF SAN ILDEFONSO.
Plaintiff.
)
)
)
v,
)
Docket No. 354
)
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
Defendant.
).
)
PETITIONER'S REQUESTED FINDINGS OF FACT
AND BRIEF
DARwiN P. KINGSLEY. JR •
•. "KARELSEN & KARELSEN
230 Park Avenue
New York. New York 10017
Attorneys of Record for
Petit,ioner in Docket
No. 354
Of Counael:
Richard Schifter
S. Bobo Dean
Strasser, Spiegelberg,
Fri~d, Frank & Kampelman
BEFORE TliF INDIAN CLAIMS COMMISSION
PUEBLO OF SAN IL:JEFONSO.
.
Plaintiff
)
)
)
)
)
Docket No. 354
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. )
Defendant.
)
PLAINTIFF'S REQUESTED
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. STIPULATED MATTERS
Finding No.1
Standing to Sue
The Pueblo of San Ildefonao, the Plaintiff herein. is and has
been since time immemorial a tribe of American Indians residing
within the present territor-ial limits of the United States.
The
Plaintiff has beEmrecognized by the Government of the United
States as a tribe represented by its Governor and Council.
This
action was instituted within the time allowed by the Indian Claims
Commission Act by and under the direction of the Plaintiff. acting
'"
through its Governor and Council.
Finding No.2
Area of Aboriginal Occupancy
At tbe time of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which was
concluded on February 2, 1848, 9 Stat. 922, the Pueblo of San
Ildefonso aboriginally and exclusively used and occupied an area
including approximately 66, 227 acres, the exterior boundaries of
. which are delineated on Defendant's Exhibit 1 and are described
as follows:
Commencing at a mountain peak located about 500
feet due south of .the southwest corner of the Santa
Clara Reservation;
Thence southwesterly and westerly along the moun­
tain north of Guaje Canyon to a point on said ridge
lying northeast of the southwest corner of Section
26, T. 20 N., R. 5 E.;
Thence due north to a ridge immediately north of
Chupader-os Canyon;'
Thence northeasterly, easterly and southeasterly
along said ridge to the point where it intersects
".
the north boundary of the San Ildefonso Pueblo Granh
Thence due east along the north boundary of the
San Ildefonso Pueblo Grant to the northeast corner
of said Grant; .
Thence southeasterly and southerly, along a line
running halfway in between the east boundary of
the San Ildefonso Pueblo Grant and the west
boundary of the Pojoaque Pueblo Grant, and con­
tinuing due. south to the Calabaso Arroyo;
- 2 ­
Thence westerly along the Calabaso Arroyo to
Canada Ancha;
Thence northwesterly along Canada Ancha to the
Rio Grande;
.
'Thence southwesterly along the Rio Grande to the'
ridge lying immediately north of the Rito de Ios
Frijoles;
Thence northwe~terly and northerly along said
ridge to the source of the Rito de los Frijoles;
Thence northerly to the peak of Pajarito Mountain;
Thence northerly to the point of beginning.
Finding No.3
Liability
The Defendant is liable for extinguishing the Plaintiff's Indian
title to the lands described in Finding No.2.
II.
VALUATION DATES
The Plaintiff incorporates by reference and restates as its
requested findings of fact number 4 through 7 the requested findings
of fact identified as Finding No. 19 through Finding No. 22 filed by
the plaintiff, the Pueblo of Santo Domingo, in Docket No. 355, except
that the following shall be substituted for the description of lands ineluded in the Jemez Forest Reserve in 1905 set forth in Finding No.
20 in Docket No. 355:
- 3 ­
Commencing at a mountain peak located about
500 feet due south of the southwest corner of
the Santa Clara Reservation;
Thence southwesterly and westerly along the
mountain ridge north of Guaje Canyon to the
point at which said ridge intersectaethe section
line between section 21 and section 22, T. 20 N. ,
R. 7 E.;
Thence due south to the northern boundary of
the San Ildefonso Indian Reservation;
i'
Thence due west to the northwest corner of
the San Ildefonso, Indian Reservation;
Thence due south along the western boundary
of the San Ildefonso Indian Reservation to the
northern boundary of the Ramon Vigil Grant;
Thence due west along the northern boundary
of the Ramon Vigil Grant to the northwest
corner of the Ramon Vigil Grant;
Thence southerly along the western boundary
of the Ramon Vigil Grant to the township line
between Township 19 North and Township 18
North;
Thence due west along said Township line
to the eastern boundary of Baca Location
No.1;
Thence due north' along the eastern boundary
of Baca Location No. 1 to the point of beginning.
together with the following additional findings:
Finding No.8
Enlargement of Taylor Grazing District No.1
On December 4, 1944, the Secretary of the Interior issued an
order modifying the boundaries of Grazing District No. 1 in the State
- 4 ­
of New Mexico, pursuant to the provisions of the Taylor Grazing
Act.
11
By this order an area of the Plaintiff's Indian title lands
located within T. 21 N., R. 7 E., and including all or parts of
sections 20 through 25, 27 through 29, and 32 through 36, '{tere
added to Grazing District No. I, with the effect that the Plaintiff
was required to obtain grazing licenses and pay grazing fees for
the use of these lands. The effective date of the order was December
15, 1944, the date of its publication in the Federal Register.
The
Indian title of the Plaintiff to these lands was extinguished on such
date, which shall be the valuation date thereof.
Finding No.9
Conclusion
The Plaintiff is entitled to recover from the Defendant the
fair market value of the 66,227 acres described in Finding No.2
as of the valuation dates determined herein, less such offsets, if
any, to which the Defendant may be entitled under the Indian Claims
Commission Act, 60 Stat. 1049.
11
9 Fed. Reg. 14650 (1944)
- 5 ­
..
BEFORE THE INDIAN CLAIMS COMMISSION
PUEBLO OF SAN ILDEFONSO,
Plaintiff,
v.
)
)
)
)
Docket No. 354
)
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
Defendant.
)
PLAINTIFF'S BRIEF ON
VALUATION DATES
The parties herein have stipulated that the Plaintiff has
established Indian title as of February 2, 1848 to an ar-ea de­
lineated on a certain map prepared by the Bureau of Land Manage­
ment and filed with the Commission and that the Defendant is liable
for extinguishing such Indian title. Excluding spanilland grants
and certain reservations with respect to which the D'!endant1s
liability has not been stipulated, the stipulated area of aboriginal
occupancy comprises approximately 66,227 acres. See Finding
No.2.
There is no dispute between the Plaintiff and the Defendant
as to the essential facts on which the time of extinguishment of
Indian title in this claim depends.
The Plaintiff and the Defendant
both admit that the Plaintiff's Indian title lands can be divided into
"
,
three categories: lands entered, settled and patented to settlers
on various dates under the Homestead Act or similar laws, lands
included within the Jemez For-estReaer-ve in 1905, and lands in­
cluded in Grazing District No. 1 under the Taylor Grazing Act,
48 Stat. 1269, in 194 1• and 1944. The only dispute between the
Plaintiff and the Defendant on the issue of valuation dates is
whether the foregoing events extinguished the Plaintiff's Indian
title
OF
whether, as the Defendant contends, it had
alr~ady
been
exttngutshed by a course of Congressional activity demonstrating
that Congress considered these lands to be public lands free of
Indian title.
The Plaintiff herein adopts the argument advanced by the
Pueblo of Santo Domingo in part 2 of its Brief on Indian Title and
Valuation Dates in Docket No. 355. For the reasons stated in
said Brief and on the facts ,set forth in the foregoing Findings
04'
Fact, which facts are not in controver-sy, it is respectfully sub­
mitted that the Commission enter an order fixing the following
valuation dates of the Plaintiff's Indian title lands:
(a) October 12, 1905 as to lands included in
the Jemez Fo.rest Reserve,
,..2 ­
'.
(b) June 22,·1941 and December 15, 1944 as
,to lands included in Taylor Grazing District No. 1 on
these respective dates; and
(c) the dates of the issuance of patents as to
all lands actually entered, settled and patented,
00­
less the parties can agree, with the approval of the
Commission, on an average valuation date for these
lands.
Respectfully sUbmitted,
DARWIN P. KINGSLEY,m.·
KARELSEN & KARELSEN
Attorneys of Record
Of Counaek
Richard Schifter
S. BoboDean
Strasser, Spiegelberg,
Fried, Frank & Kampelman
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that ten copies of the foregoing Requested
Findings of Fact and Brief were mailed,. postage prepaid, this
27th day of August 1970, to the Attorney General of the United
States, attorney for the Defendant in Docket No. 354.
- 3 ­
forP~titioner