The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1882-01-12
THE DISPUTED BOUNDARY BE-
TWEEN TEXAS AND THE
INDIAN NATION.


Colonel John NJ. Swisher has for
some time been engaged in patient
research concerning the supposedun-
settled boundary line between Texas
and the Indian Nation, and the re-
suit is that he, has collected much in
formation most interesting and val
liable to the public. The STATES
MAN has frequently solicited the use
of documentary matter in the pos
session ofthis gentleman, and at last
he has been prevailed upon
to allow us the use of it.
From the package of papers turned
over we have made selections which
are now given to the public, through
these columns, for the first time. If
one examine the statute books of
Texas it will be found that legisla-
ture after legislature has recognized
the claims of the state to what is
known as Greer county. This ter
ritory lies southeast of the
Panhandle, between the north and
the south forks of Red River, and
whatever of dispute there may be as
to the boundary line between Texas
and the Indian Nation, arises out of
the fact that certain United States
commissioner, whose name appears
in the following correspondence,
recognized the south fork of the
Red River as the continuation of
said river, while the Texas au-
thorities have persistently held
that the uorth fork is the true river.
1t is said. the south fork of Red River
is often a dry stream, while the
north fork constantly flows
body of water and while the trac
ing of the bed of the south fork is
more extended than that of the
north fork, this water shows that the
north fork is really the true Red
River. This has been the theory
of the Texas authorities, and
so it would long since have
been recognized by all as true,
had it not been for the report
of this United States commits
sioner. The same theory might as
well be applied to the Mississippi
river as to the Rid River, since the
Missouri river is much longer than
the Mississippi above their point of
confluence. The Missouri river is
much longer than the Mississippi.
measuring both from the mouth
of the Mississippi to their sour
ces, and, yet, since the great
est volume of water flows down
from toward the lakes, in
stead of from tie Rocky Mountains,
the Father of Waters extends north
ward towards source, instead of
westward. Many such precedents
exist, and the bare fact that the
bed of the south fork. so often dry,
is longer than that of the north fork,
ought to cut no figure in decision
But the documentary evidence
now laid before our readers, coming
from Gen. Sam Houston and other
high authority, should make the
dispute as to this boundary line one
of simplest concession on the part of
the federal government. Congress
should take the matter in hand at
once and fix by statute the bound
ary of the Indian Nation as
not in conflict, indirectly even,
with the boundary of Texas.
1t is very evident that congress
and the Washington administration
have no particular faith in the south
fork of Red River being the
boundary line, because Indian res
ervations have been defined up to
the line of the north fork, while
Greer county has been religiously
left alone in this behalf. Greer
county is judicially attached to
Texas by its statute laws, and the
territory has been set aside for spe-
cific purposes by acts of the Texas
legislature. Congress and the federal
government have never presumed to
lay hands on Greer county, and
perusal of the evidence ap-
pended will present excellent rea-
sons why this is so. Melish's map.
referred to in the subjoined letter
of Governor Houston, was the first
map of Texas made by authority
after her annexation:
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT.,
AUSTIN, April 28th, 1860.
Major VIM. H. Russell, Commissioner of
Boundary Survey.
IR-Upon receipt of these orders,
and IN prosecution of your commits
sion, you will proceed to join the
commissioner on the part of the Uni
ted States, at or near Fort Arbuckle,
for the continuance and completion
of the survey of the boundary line
between the state of Texas and the
United States.
With this you will receive copy of
an extract from the treaty of Febru-
ary %, 1919, confirmed April 5, 1882,
between the United States and Mex
leo, wherein the boundary lines are
clearly defined and laid down In
prosecuting the survey upon cor
rect basis, there can arise but one
point of dispute, that is, which of
the three forks are to be regarded
as the main prong of the Rio RoXo,
or Red River. The treaty specifies
that the boundary line shall be run
according to the limits laid down in
Melish's map, improved to January
l, 1918.
1t would appear from a reference
to Marcy's survey, that the three
prongs of Red River were traced to
their sources. The first, or north
fork; the second, or middle fork,
running and emptying into the north
fork and Prairie-dog-town river, or
the south fork of the main prong.
1t would also seem from the particu-
lar notice given to the fork first ex-
plored (the north fork) that Mr..
Marcy was clearly of the opinion
that it was the true Rio RoxU or
Rad River DrODer and as such