Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub
[subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][subsumed][ocr errors][merged small][graphic]

100th meridian, is substantially an east and west line, and that west of the 100th meridian It is westward and northwestwardly to a point near Santa Fé and the Snow Mountains.

If the case depended upon that map, it could not be doubted that the territory in dispute is outside of the limits of Texas. The direction of the treaty is to run westward, not northwestwardly, on Red river, to the 100th meridian. According to the view pressed by the state, the true line extends, from the junction of the North Fork of Red River with Red river, northwardly, then easterly, then northwestwardly up that fork, although at such junction there is another wide stream, coming almost directly from the west, and which fully meets the requirement of the treaty to follow the course of the Red river westwardly to the 100th meridian. We do not feel authorized to assent to this view. In our judgment the direction in the treaty to follow the course of the Red river westward to the 100th meridian takes the line, not up the North Fork, but westwardly with the river now known as the "Prairie Dog Town Fork," or "South Fork of Red River," until it reaches that meridian; thence due north to the point where Texas agreed that its line "on the north" should commence.

This conclusion is strongly fortified by an inspection of the numerous maps placed before us, and which were made prior to February 8, 1860, on which day the legislature of Texas, with knowledge that the territory in dispute was claimed by the United States, passed an act creating the county of Greer, and thereby assumed that it was part of the territory properly and rightfully belonging to that state, at the time its independence was achieved, as well as when it was admitted into the Union. 2 Sayles' Early Laws Tex. art. 2886. Every map before us, published after the treaty of 1819 and prior to 1860, beginning with the Melish map of 1823, shows that the line, going from east to west, followed the course of Red river westward until it crossed the true 100th meridian at or near the southwest corner of the territory designated as "Unassigned Land." Upon each and all of these maps appear streams coming from the northwest, having a northwest and southeast course, that empty into the main river. But none of those streams are marked as a part of the line established by the treaty of 1819.

Among the maps to which we refer are the following: (1) "A Map of Mexico, Louisiana, and the Missouri Territory, Including the States of Mississippi, Alabama Territory, East and West Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, and Part of the Island of Cuba," by John H. Robinson, M. D., copyrighted in 1819, and published at Philadelphia. The author is, no doubt, the gentleman of the same name who accompanied Maj. Pike in his expeditions, and is spoken of by that officer as a man of enterprise and science. The ver marked on that map as "Red River,"

east of the 100th meridian, has its source in the region of Santa Fé, and corresponds with the Red river, or the Rio Colorado, of Natchitoches, as delineated on Pike's map. (2) Morse's map of the United States, published in 1822, and which accompanied an official report made by him in that year to the secretary of war, of the conditions of the various Indian tribes of the country. On this map appears Red river, with its source not far from Santa Fé, and running southeastwardly to a short distance west of the 100th meridian, from which point it extends eastwardly all along the southern line of Indian Territory; thence southeastwardly to the Mississippi. (3) Carey and Lea's Atlas of 1822. On this map appears Red river having a westward course the entire distance from about the 94th to the 102d degree of longitude, between the 33d and 34th degrees of latitude, and constituting the southern line of the Indian Territory. Red river on this map has its source near the Snow Mountains. (4) The map of Maj. Long, of the topographical engineers, inscribed to Mr. Calhoun, secretary of war, and published in 1822. On this map appears a river with its source near the mountains of Santa Fé, and running southeastwardly, then eastwardly to the 100th meridian, and continuing then eastwardly along the entire line between Indian Territory and Texas. As delineated on Long's map, between the 103d and 101st meridians, that river is marked "Rio Roxo, or Red River," and near the *95th meridian it is marked "Red River." (5) Tanner's map of North America, 1822. (6) Tanner's map of North America (1823) shows a river on the south border of what is now Indian Territory, marked "Red River." On each side of it, after it passes the 100th meridian, there are prongs or streams north and south; and the river, near its end, after it has passed 25° west from Washington, is marked "Red River." Going off from the Red river at about 20° longitude west from Washington is the river marked False Washitta, which comes from the northwest. Red river, as marked on that map, extends nearer to Santa Fé than the False Washitta. (7) Finley's American Atlas (1826) shows Red river on the south boundary of Arkansas, whose course, going from the east, is westward until about the 100th meridian is reached, and west of the 100th meridian it is marked "R. Roxo, or Red R." At longitude 20° west from Washington a river comes from the northwest marked "False Washitta." The extension marked as above is much longer than any stream emptying into Red river from the north or the northwest. (8) "A Complete Historical, Chronological, and Geographical American Atlas," published by Carey & Lea, at Philadelphia, in 1826, on which will be found marked "Red River," whose course, going from east to west, is westwardly past the 100th meridian, and then northwestwardly in the direction of Santa Fé. At

about the 98th meridian a much shorter stream comes into it from the northwest, and is unmarked. (9) A German atlas of America, published at Leipsic in 1830, contains a map which shows the boundary established in 1819 on the west side of Louisiana, and shows Red river along the whole southern line of the Indian Territory. Coming into that river from the northwest, at 99° longitude, is an unmarked stream; and coming from the northwest, and emptying into Red river, at about 97° longitude, is

another

stream marked "Falsche Washitta." (10) Young's New Map of Texas, published at Philadelphia in 1835 by Mitchell, and a copy of part of which is given on the next page. On this map appears Red river, with its source a short distance from Santa Fé, and marked, east of the 100th meridian, as "Rio Roxo, or Red River, of "Louisiana," running first southeastwardly, then eastwardly along the southern boundary of Indian Territory. (11) Maillard's map of Texas, published in 1841, showing Red river as forming the line between the Indian Territory and Texas from about the 94th degree of longitude to the 100th meridian, having a course westward and eastward between those meridians, and marked on the map, east of the 100th meridian, as “Rio Roxo or Red River, of Louisiana." (12) A map compiled for the department of state, under the direction of Col. Abert and Lieut. Emory, and published by the war department in 1844. On this map appears Red river, whose course, going from east to west, from a point near the 94th degree of longitude, is substantially westward along the whole line between the Indian Territory and Texas. After passing the 100th meridian, its course is westwardly and northwestwardly in the direction of Santa Fé. (13) Tanner's map of the United States and Mexico, published in 1846. That map shows Red river having an eastward and westward course, just south of the 34th degree of latitude, and marking the southern line of Indian Territory. (14) Colton's map of the United States, published in 1848, shows Red river forking near the 98th meridian, one fork extending westwardly and northwestwardly towards Santa Fé, marked "Rio Roxo, or Red River," between 100° and 102°, and "Red River" between 102° and 104°. (15) Cordova's Map of the State of Texas, "compiled from the records of the general land office of the state by Robert Creuzbaur," and published in 1849. Creuzbaur entered the land office in Texas before the admission of that state into the Union, and remained there for many years. While there he never heard of any claim by Texas to the territory now called "Greer County." Upon the original of this map is a certificate by Thomas W. Ward, commissioner of the land office of Texas from January 5, 1841, to March 20, 1848, and also a certificate by his successor, George W. Smyth. Ward certified that the map had been compiled by Creuzbaur from the records

of the general land office of Texas, and that it was the most correct representation of the state he had seen, or which had come to his knowledge; "the meanders of the rivers are all correctly represented, being made from actual survey." Smyth certified that he "has no hesitancy in declaring it as his firm conviction that this map is a very correct representation of the state, representing all returns up to date, having been compiled with great care from the records of the general land office." On this map is also the certificate of the governor and secretary of state as to the official character of Ward and Smyth. It is further attested, under date of August 12, 1848, by Senators Rusk and Houston and by Representatives Kauffman and Pilsbury, as follows: "We, the undersigned senators and representatives from the state of Texas, do hereby certify that we have carefully examined J. de Cordova's map of the state of Texas, compiled by R. Creuzbaur from the records of the general land office of Texas, and have no hesitation in saying that no map could surpass this in accuracy and fidelity. It has delineated upon it every county in the state; its towns, rivers, and streams; and we cordially recommend it to every person who desires correct geographical information of our state. To the persons desirous of visiting Texas, it would be invaluable." (16) Mitchell's New Atlas of North and South America, published by Thomas Cowperthwaite & Co., Philadelphia (1851), shows on the map of Texas a river marked "Red River," whose course, after the latitude midway between 33° and 34° is reached, is westward. It continues in a westerly direction, without scarcely any change, until it reaches the 102d meridian, and then turns northwestwardly in the direction of Santa Fé.

All of these maps place the territory in dispute east of the 100th meridian, and north of the southern line of the Indian Territory, as that line is claimed by the United States. They are all inaccurate, if any part of that territory is within the limits of Texas. No one of them so locates Red river that its course, going westward (from the point where the line between Texas and Louisiana intersects the Red River) to the 100th meridian, would take the line of the treaty of 1819 up the North Fork of Red river until it intersected that meridian near the 35th degree of latitude.

The conclusion to be drawn from the maps to which we have referred is sustained by other maps, namely: (1) A map of the state of Texas, purporting to have been compiled by Stephen F. Austin, and published at Philadelphia by H. S. Tanner in 1837. The original is in the general land office of Texas, and upon it is the certificate of the commissioner of such land office, dated March 13, 1882, showing that it was temporarily deposited in that office. (2) A map of Texas, purporting to have been compiled from surveys on record in the general land office of

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][graphic]

the republic of Texas in the year 1839 by Richard S. Hunt and Jesse F. Randel. Upon this map is a certificate of the secretary of state of Texas, approving the map, and stating that it had been compiled "from the best and most recent authorities." This certificate is followed by one from the commissioner of the general land office of the republic of Texas, dated April 25, 1839; stating that "the compiler of this map has had access to the records of this office, and that the map was compiled from them." (3) Disturnel's map of the United States of Mexico, published in 1847, and used at the making of the treaty of Guadaloupe Hidalgo. (4) A map prepared for the president of the United States under the direction of the commissioner of the land office in 1849. (5) "A Travelers' Map of the State of Texas," "compiled from the records of the general land office, the maps of the coast survey, the reports of the boundary commission, and various other military surveys and reconnoissances, by Charles W. Pressler." This map was published in 1867. The author held a position in the land office of Texas for more than 30 years.

But it is said that the United States has in many ways, and during a very long period, recognized the claim of Texas to the territory in dispute, and, upon principles of justice and equity, should not be heard at this late day to question the title of the state.

Is there any basis for the suggestion that the United States has ever acquiesced in the claim of the state that the treaty line westward along Red river to the 100th meridian follows the course of the North Fork from its mouth northwardly and northwestwardly until that meridian is reached at a point north of the 35th degree of latitude? This question deserves the most careful examination, for long acquiescence by the general government in the claim of Texas would be entitled to great weight.

In support of the suggestion that the United States has recognized the claim of Texas, reference is made to the fact that in 1843 some Texan troops under the command of Col. Snively went into the territory here in dispute, and were arrested and disarmed by Capt. Cooke, of the United States army, who had been specially assigned to the duty of protecting caravans of Santa Fé traders through the territories of the United States to the Texan frontier. Of his conduct the republic of Texas complained. Connected with that matter was an alleged forcible entry into the customhouse at Bryarly's Landing, on Red river, by certain citizens of the United States, and the taking therefrom of goods that had been seized as forfeited under the laws of Texas. The settlement of that dispute between the two governments is now relied on as showing a recognition by the United States of the claim of Texas to the territory here in controversy. We have been unable to find anything in the history

of those proceedings to justify this contention of the state. From the letter of Mr. Calhoun, secretary of state, to Mr. Van Zandt, charge d'affaires of the republic of Texas, of date August 14, 1844, it appears that Capt. Cooke's conduct in this matter was made the subject of a court of inquiry. Mr. Calhoun said: "The court was ordered, at the request of my immediate predecessor, in conformity to the intimation contained in his communication to Mr. Van Zandt of the 19th of January, last, in order to ascertain more fully, and in the most authentic form, the circumstances and facts connected with the proceedings of Captain Cooke and his command in the disarming of the Texan force under the command of Colonel Snively. Mr. Van Zandt will find, on recurring to the extract, that the opinion of the court is that the place where the Texan force was disarined was within the territory of the United States, that there was nothing in the conduct of Captain Cooke which was harsh or unbecoming, and that he did not exceed theg "authority derived from the orders under which he acted. It is proper to add that the court consisted of three officers of experience and high standing, that the case was fully laid before it, and that its opinion appears to be fully sustained by the evidence. There seems to be no doubt that Captain Cooke was sincerely of the opinion that the Texan force was within the territory of the United States, and that the fulfillment of his orders to protect the trade made it his duty, under such circumstances, to disarm them. It is readily conceded that the commander of the Texan forces, with equal sincerity, believed the place he occupied was within the territory of Texas. Which was right, or which wrong, can be ascertained with certainty only by an actual survey and demarkation of the line dividing the two countries between the Red and Arkansas rivers." After observing that it was neither necessary nor advisable to renew between the two governments the discussion on the question whether the Texan force was or was not within the limits of the United States, Mr. Calhoun proceeded: "In the hope, therefore, of closing the discussion and putting an end to this exciting subject, the undersigned renews the offer of his predecessor contained in the communication above referred to, to restore the arms taken from the Texan force, or to make compensation for them,' and his assurance, given at the same time that 'his government never meditated and will not sanction any indignity towards the government of Texas, nor any wrong towards her people, and will repair any injury of either kind which may be made to appear.' This offer was accepted by the government of Texas, its charge d'affaires saying: "As it is not probable that the arms could be returned in the order in which they were taken, compensation will be received for them." 1 House Ex. Doc. (28th

[ocr errors]
« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »