| 9San Jose, January 12th. 1906.
HON. S. F. LEIB,
SAN JOSE,
My dear Sir;
I intended to send you by Mrs. Marriott, the maps which
I am now sending by the bearer of this note.
The land of which I am negotiating purchase (50 acres)
adjoins the thirty five acres which I purchased from the Corbett Estate,
originally a part of the "San Mateo Rancho" and of which I sent you
the abstract. That part of the Easton property immediately adjoin-
my tract was also originally a part of the "San Mateo Rancho" and is
included in the 50 acres under consideration. The 50 acres does not
take in all of the portion of the S. M. Rancho thus purchased, but only
as much as lies between the railroad tracks and the Bay.
Ansel I. Easton purchased from Howard in May 1860
46 42/100 acres, being part of the S.M. Rancho, (see pages 82 to 90
of the S.M. abstract) and later about 18 acres more was purchased by
the Easton family from Wm. Ralston, and it is this eighteen acres
which is referred to by the Searcher of Records when he says he finds
no title in Ralston. XX I think my abstract of the "San Mateo Rancho"
shows that Mr. Ralston had at least as good a title as the U.S. Patent
gave to Howard. It seems to me that this 18 acres was included in the
portion of the Howard property allotted to Poett and which he sold to
Burlingame and Burlingame sold to Ralston (See pages 67 to 77 of the
abstract of the "San Mateo Rancho"). | 9San Jose, January 12th. 1906.
HON. S. F. LEIB,
SAN JOSE,
My dear Sir;
I intended to send you by Mrs. Marriott, the maps which
I am now sending by the bearer of this note.
The land of which I am negotiating purchase (50 acres)
adjoins the thirty five acres which I purchased from the Corbett Estate,
originally a part of the "San Mateo Rancho" and of which I sent you
the abstract. That part of the Easton property immediately adjoin-
my tract was also originally a part of the "San Mateo Rancho" and is
included in the 50 acres under consideration. The 50 acres does not
take in all of the portion of the S. M. Rancho thus purchased, but only
as much as lies between the railroad tracks and the Bay.
Ansel I. Easton purchased from Howard in May 1860
46 42/100 acres, being part of the S.M. Rancho, (see pages 82 to 90
of the S.M. abstract) and later about 18 acres more was purchased by
the Easton family from Wm. Ralston, and it is this eighteen acres
which is referred to by the Searcher of Records when he says he finds
no title in Ralston. XX I think my abstract of the "San Mateo Rancho"
shows that Mr. Ralston had at least as good a title as the U.S. Patent
gave to Howard. It seems to me that this 18 acres was included in the
portion of the Howard property allotted to Poett and which he sold to
Burlingame and Burlingame sold to Ralston (See pages 67 to 77 of the
abstract of the "San Mateo Rancho"). |
EN
|
