The Peralta Stone Maps, Real Maps to Lost Gold Mines or Cruel Hoax?

[somehiker]

I may be wrong,but I thought that reavis was prosecuted for have fraudulent papers that he mixed with real documents to make himself the owner.

The Baron of Arizona

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[gollum]

Marius,

Maybe when the Peraltas worked their mines from early Fall to late Spring they built arrastras and smelting furnaces, but this was after the US/Mexico War. Their stay was only going to be a brief one. No time for all the niceties. Get what ore they could, hand cobble it as much as possible, then take all they could back to Mexico. This was supposed to be a quick in and out operation.

The version of the Land Grant I have heard was that the original Peralta Land Grant was not what Reavis tried to pull off. Much smaller. I will have to go through what I have for the details, but will post more tonight.

Mike

 

[markmar]

deducer

Like Cristobal Peralta said to Salazar in 1924 , any record of the Peraltas property and mines in the Superstition area , don't exist . Also he said how these mines were their property

http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~gcundiff/LostDutchman/ruth/clark/Salazar%20Survey%20by%20Clay%20Worst.pdf

 

[deducer]

deducer

Like Cristobal Peralta said to Salazar in 1924 , any record of the Peraltas property and mines in the Superstition area , don't exist . Also he said how these mines were their property

http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~gcundiff/LostDutchman/ruth/clark/Salazar%20Survey%20by%20Clay%20Worst.pdf

The question is not whether the Peraltas owned land or not (they were granted land in California), but that there is no record of any Peraltas being "granted" a large parcel of land through church or government where the Superstitions are concerned, as was alleged when you said:

Why the King of Spain gave to Peraltas this suspicious region

.

 

[markmar]

deducer

When I wrote " suspicion region " I meant only the Superstitions . And the titles of property in that era ( 1758 ) were given by the King's representants in the New World .

Read at http://www.google.gr/url?url=http:/...YQFjAG&usg=AFQjCNEW66hRpJp7P6C_ya__NXs6SzdOKw
, page 4 , where is written how the petitions are original and were signed by Viceroy of the King of Spain .

P.S.

Where are these documents now ? The trial of this case was only to vanish the evidence ? Seems like a gov conspiracy .

 

[markmar]

deducer

Hear a good one . in the same link , page 3 , the General Surveyor wrote :

"Fourth, That again admitting its legality, it is absolutely

impossible to establish its boundaries, Lite alleged grantnever haying been bounded or surveyed, and without identified​

boundaries it fails. "

He has a thought , but the justifications are simple

 

[deducer]

deducer

When I wrote " suspicion region " I meant only the Superstitions . And the titles of property in that era ( 1758 ) were given by the King's representants in the New World .

Read at http://www.google.gr/url?url=http:/...YQFjAG&usg=AFQjCNEW66hRpJp7P6C_ya__NXs6SzdOKw
, page 4 , where is written how the petitions are original and were signed by Viceroy of the King of Spain .

P.S.

Where are these documents now ? The trial of this case was only to vanish the evidrnce ? Seems like a gov conspiracy .

Marius,

You are quoting from the original petition filed by Reavis as put forth by the Surveyor General, Royal Johnson in his report on the Peralta land grant.

Did you read on the previous page, the conclusion of Johnson's report? Namely that:



You may want to take another look at your Peralta theory.

 

[markmar]

And something else :

In the Salazar story , he said how one picture was from the mines site . Which means how the mines were close each other in a small region . Something like the mines in the Latin heart .
And for the number 7 in the Cristobal blurred picture , I made my picture of this region to looks like his ( old ) . You can choose what number 7 you like , the big one or the smaller .

 

[deducer]

deducer

Hear a good one . in the same link , page 3 , the General Surveyor wrote :

"Fourth, That again admitting its legality, it is absolutely

impossible to establish its boundaries, Lite alleged grantnever haying been bounded or surveyed, and without identified​

boundaries it fails. "

He has a thought , but the justifications are simple

I think he means to say that "even if it were legal," it would still be impossible to properly establish the boundaries according to the documents Reavis filed, which adds further credence to the fact that the whole thing was an act of fraud.

 

[markmar]

Marius,

You are quoting from the original petition filed by Reavis as put forth by the Surveyor General, Royal Johnson in his report on the Peralta land grant.

Did you read on the previous page, the conclusion of Johnson's report? Namely that:

View attachment 1032751

You may want to take another look at your Peralta theory.

deducer

About " First " Where are the documents from the King and Viceroy which write these statements ? Just with the words ? In my country a proverb says : " With farts can't paint eggs " .

 

[johnmark29020]

And something else :

In the Salazar story , he said how one picture was from the mines site . Which means how the mines were close each other in a small region . Something like the mines in the Latin heart .
And for the number 7 in the Cristobal blurred picture , I made my picture of this region to looks like his ( old ) . You can choose what number 7 you like , the big one or the smaller .

<img src="http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=1032752"/> <img src="http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=1032753"/>

Can you explain the importance of the number 7.

 

[markmar]

Johnmark

The number 7 has multiple meanings , but in the Cristobal's picture is only the mountain shape . I believe Salazar saw the big seven in the picture .

 

[deducer]

Where are the documents from the King and Viceroy which write these statements ?

There are none.

Royal Johnson found no such documents.

 

[markmar]

There are none.

Royal Johnson found no such documents.

So , were the words against original documents ( with dates and signatures ) . And won the words . What irony . And the History goes on .

 

[deducer]

So , were the words against original documents ( with dates and signatures ) . And won the words . What irony . And the History goes on .

What original documents?

 

[markmar]

deducer

In contadiction with the :

"Fourth, That again admitting its legality, it is absolutely

impossible to establish its boundaries, the alleged grant never having been bounded or surveyed, and without identifiedboundaries it fails. "

In the next page is the Peralta document :

" Fourth. Statement of Peralta, dated 13th of May 1758,showing by metes and bounds the location of the land granted "
​

​

​

​

​

 

[markmar]

What original documents?

Hello?
Okay now... Is better the debate about the Peralta land grant to stop here .

PS

But a last add :

The General Surveyor wrote in page 4 about the Peralta documents :

" All of which is fully and clearly set forth in original​

documents hereto annexed, marked "Exhibit A," with translation​

same, which original documents are from the government archives of the City of Mexico, and are made part of this petition. "

 

[Somero]

I believe the documents used as evidence in court where the forged documents Reavis had filed his land grant with, they had NO official corresponding documents in any archives anywhere. Reavis would have had a sweet deal since he was charging "rent" throughout Arizona. He got to greedy and decided to take on the Government hoping all his tampering in the archives would pay off. Funny how this all got mixed in with the legend.

 

[somehiker]

Can you explain the importance of the number 7.

Could be it was something Cristobal knew or should have known he had to look for?
The "7" was on the map, rather than on the photograph Marius,
and near one of the small square marks which indicated each of the three peaks from which the photos were taken.
"El Sombrero" could be seen in all three photos, but little else other than skylines.

from the article....



But could it be that the one who made Cristobal's map had noticed this seven,
before climbing the mountain from which one of the photos was taken ?

from one of my photos:



Perhaps he didn't notice the "8"....

 

[markmar]

SH

All are possible . My picture is from the Peralta sign region , and is a high point . We don't have the Cristobal's picture to compare with and we can make only assumptions .