“MONSTROUS AND ILLEGAL PROCEEDINGS”: LAW ...

unanimous and respected testimony of honorable vecinos, impartial and long-standing
[antiguos] settlers of lands in the area I am claiming.” Perez further stated that the witnesses
had appeared “solemnly” before the local alcalde mayor and “two other witnesses of
recognized impartiality” to give their statements regarding the land boundaries. She
concluded that such powerful testimony trumped all other forms of proof, “meriting
complete faith and belief” by the court. 103
Hornos’ attorney, Gilberto Rivero, responded that the written documents should
decide the dispute. However, he then spent the bulk of his pleadings focusing on the
character of the witnesses. He noted that several of the witnesses were not “vecinos of the
town” but Perez’s relatives. He further pointed out that others were of advanced age,
incapable of testifying regarding the facts at hand. He concluded: “The witnesses presented
by Doña Petrona Perez do know what they are talking about.” 104 What is interesting is that
Rivero felt compelled to challenge the testimony at all given the apparently strong
documentary evidence in his client’s favor. Moreover, he did so in a manner designed to
distance the witnesses from their status as local vecinos with intimate knowledge of the facts
in question. His response reflected the potential power of the testimony of honorable vecinos
in the borderlands, even in the face of a contradictory written record. The verdict did so as
well. The court concluded that the land needed to be resurveyed. This voided Hornos’
documentary proof regarding the legal boundaries of her property. 105
This brief vignette from Entre Ríos again suggests the centrality of vecindad in forging
the requisite evidence necessary to establish legal claims. Beyond important issues of legal
strategy and factual proof, however, vecino status also offered important practical advantages,
103 Ibid., 55bis.
104 Ibid., 194-194bis.
105 Ibid., 225bis.
115