PART 3 of A WHITE PAPER GUIDE TO HB724
SUPPLEMENT #2 hashtag #whitepaperhb724
DATED MAY 25, 2014
UNCLAIMED MINERAL PROCEEDS COMMISSION IN ITS HISTORICAL MISSION
March 21, 2014/April 25, 2014
BY MR. GEORGE FARIAS
TOPIC: RESPONSE TO MEMORANDUM FROM COMMISSIONERS TRACE BURTON,
DONATO RAMOS JR. AND JAIME RANGEL DATED APRIL 25, 2014
ON LEGAL ISSUES RELATED TO THE OWNERSHIP OF MINERALS IN TEXAS
Since I am not an attorney I cannot formally respond to this memorandum about mineral ownership
in Texas. However, I can respond from a layman’s point of view and I will ask our legal advocates
to respond later from a professional standpoint. After reviewing the memorandum and thinking about
the impact on our claims from mineral production from unclaimed wells, I have concluded that these
issues are irrelevant to our mission as follows:
1. Ownership of Minerals to Texas Citizens per Constitution of 1866.
As stated previously in testimony, the children and grandchildren of the original land grantee
were living on the lands and the rights were thus awarded to the family of the grantee. The
first major oil discovery was in 1894 in Corsicana and later in the South Texas land grants.
Our families have full rights to those minerals and some descendants still own parcels with
title and are receiving royalties. Therefore it does not make any difference what happened
before 1866 whether the state owned it or gave it retrospectively.
2. Transfer of Minerals by Contract.
In the Heirs brochure in the third panel under “Unclaimed Surface and Mineral Estates,”
the opening paragraph says. “Normally under Texas property law when a person sells a
piece of land and no mention is made of the mineral contained, the rights pass on to the
purchaser. In the case of land grants, if no mention is made of the transference of minerals
by sale or conveyance of the land, the minerals are retained by the seller and pass on to
the heirs.” In the brochure I synthesized the research of others and this passage was taken
from the website of the Lands Grant Justice Association from their history section as footnoted.
I believe the author of this legal interpretation is Attorney Don Tomlinson and you may
question him on this when he testifies June 27th.
Since this statement relates to scrutiny of a contract it has no relevance to our claims because the reason
unclaimed wells exist is that no contract can be found. There is no paperwork to determine ownership.
These issues, then, have no bearing on our claims.
Author George Farías blogged and used by permission Please note: these are Mr. Farias' personal presentations to the HB724 commission as a descendant/heir and do not reflect the opinions of anyone else. They are a matter of public record.
Photo Credit: Source: the Voice of Change Network Copyright 2014 All Rights Reserved
Please stay tuned for the part 4 of this white paper or see the tag #whitepaperhb724 for all articles in this series