The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1883-01-18

them would be, which one OF the two
stresms from n point at the junction
should the line run up the river 10 the
Tooth degree OF longitude, and thence run
north TO 381f degree OF latitude north
Texas claims. and think rightiully, thai
the line would run up the stream now
known as the north fork, and the United
States claim that II should run up the
south fork. This Is the issue between
them.
1t is claimed that the line should run ur
the south fork, because IL IL broader be.
tween its banks, and Is the longer stream
reaching farther west into the Stake d
Plain, and is therefore the main Red
River. Its broader bed may be attribute Z
to the character OF earth through which ii
passes, and to the fact that IL runs from
The head OF it 10 the junction nea IL
straight eastward on a direct line of the
declension OF altitude. After running
over sixty miles through a descending
canyon from the top to the verge of the
Staked Plain, IL then falls nearly fifteen
hundred feet In running through two de.
grees OF longitu Q to the junction. (This
Is taken nom Capt. MaTcl's Map).
The fact, also, that its source Is one BE.
gree farther west and one degree farther
south than the source OF the nor til fork
doubtless renders 1t more subject to those
frequent deluges called waterspouts that
wash out and widen The beds OF streams
throughout Texas the more and more az
you go west and south. The difference II
any, in the length at the two str. ans from
the junction 10 their sources 10 very lit
tie, perhaps not exceeding twenty miles.
capt. Marcy's map showing distances in
going up the north fork and coming down
the south fork). II is said on the other
hand that the water runs down the north
FORK in eater quantity and more con-
stantly than in the south fork, whose chsn.
pel OF sand flats is often, IL not usu-
ally, dry. This IL the report oi
persons who have recently visited and
remained in that region long enough TO
bear witness to the fact. This may be at
tTibuted to tue fact that its source and
that OF each OF Its tributaries are from one
TO two degrees further east, and to that
extent being removed from the high, dry
plains, have more regular seasons OF raj
TO supply 1t with water than the south
fork.
Such considerations as these may be In.
dulged In to ascertain which OF The tN O
10 the main fork. and should on that ac-
count be called Red River. Such con-
slderations would show the Missouri
river to be the true Mississippi river. In
this, as in many other matters Of dispute,
there are egregious errors and misconce :
tons from the mode of stating the ques-
ton at issue which lead to the inyestiga
ton of facts wholly immaterlal. In pre-
senting the question, II is said that the
line runs up Red River, and the south
fork being the main branch, IL must run
up that stream 10 the one hundredth de-
gree OF longitude.
nave shown how nearly equal are
the claims Of each TO be called the
main branch from facts pertaining
TO them derived from observation.
From this, either one OF them, in the alb
the main branch. Ii may be admitted
that the south fork is the larger and
longer, and therefore the main branch In
reference to the two nearly equal
branches of Red River, and that admission
does not settle the fact that the line must
run up that branch. The true question
Is, which one OF the two nearly equal
branches corresponds most nearly with
"the hio RoXO of Natchitoches. or Red
River" as it was known In 1873, when
the treaty was made, and''as laid down In
Melish's map of the United States, pub
lished at Philadelphia, improved to the
LIST OF January, 1915" 1t Is not the south
fork, for 1t is not laid down on Melish's
map, and was not then known 10 exist
by white men, either Americans or
Mexicans, who gave any public notice or
ihdhC any huOW IL EcCOIu vi I've MOT WAS
such fork known TO exist before Capt
Marcy was informed of 1t by his IndiaJ
guide. Beaver, during his exploration OF
l849, while he was ON the headwaters OF
the BraZOs river. (See report of Capt
Marcy) The Indian called 1t mot Red
River butt Ke-che-a-qua-ho-no, or
Prairie Dog Town river
This river Capt. Marcy afterwards
found and traversed In his exploration Of
1870 In tho fnfrnHnafinr IN hfa
be explains the extent of all previous ex-
and shows that he and his
party were The first to reach aud traverse
that river. Capt. Marcy, In his explora-
ton, was instructed to make "examina-
tlon of the Red Rivar and the country
bordering upon II from the mouth OF
Cache Greek to its Sources IHgoing up
from that point, be speaks OF the two
branches being about the same size at
their junction, and went up the fork now
known as the north fork, and followed 1t
to near Its source. In the Route there is
no surprise expressed in finding 1t where
be did or at Its course. He had Indian
guides and hunters with him, and they
gave IL no Indian name. 1t was known
and called by no other name than that
Of Red River. He traced H. to near its
a little north of 35X degrees
north latitude, which he found to be
ultItb cOuIu VI tut Nt-
madam river. And here he discovered
The only thing about Red River that did
lot seem to be known before to some
other explorers, which was, that the up
per waters Of the Canadian did not run
into and constitute part OF the Red
River of NatchitOches, as they were some
lines supposed to do. 1t was under this
Ialse impression, doubtless, that Melish
aid down the source of the most western
.I,- .fD a1 L..
9Th degree OF north latitude. which could
not have been intended to represent the
,Outh fork in its source and course. In
hat map lot 1879 he laid down two forks
)f Red River, bOih OF which are made to
-un near each other In boutherly direc-
ion to their junction, the source of both
Of them being above thirty-six degrees
north latitude. The junction OF the two
3 placed degree west of the one hum
iredth degree of longitude. The coursr
)i both of the streams of the river in
going up them from the junction turns
Ibruptly northward, very much like the
lOrth fork now does. There Is no stream
coming In from the west, as does the
'Outh fork, nor is Pease river or the Big
Wichita south OF Red River laid down,
Jut the Washita north OF Red River is
aid down. Thus is obvious that Melish
lad information concerning the streams
IN the north side OF Red River and con-
,ernIng the most northern headwaters of
Red River, but none whatever of the
treams comingiinto Red River from the
vest and southwest. The Big Wichita
md Pease river are large and long
treams, and The south fork is still larger
md longer, and no streams on his map
.ome into what he lays down as Red
river from the direction they are now
Known to how into 1t.
The fact that Melish placed two
Of Red River close together
unBing nearly parallel from points too
ar to the northwest, might lead to the
that he had some indistInct |
Information that there were two branches
n the then far west; but the manner In |
which he had laid down the more west |
I'm branch, with Its source much farther |
forth and running down In q southern |
direction. nearly parallel TO the other, TO |
he junction, shows that the only head |
waters OF that stream then known had |
heir sources In that direction up towards |
janta Fe
o part. If the most recent maps OF
Texas are examined, since that whole
eglon has been explored, 1t will be
ound that there are now two streams,
he North Fork and the Salt Fork OF Red |
liver. that are now delineated on the |
nap, almost exactly like the two forks j
q Melish's map OF 1918, both having a
Ike abrupt bend n0rtbward in going up |
hem, and like divergence from parallel |
ines SO that IL the Salt Fork were con.
iDued up thirty miles In q northwest |
curse It would reach the Canadian ut a
end southwark in that river. and the |
alt Fork thus .oined to the headwaters OF /
be Canadian would present on the i
hap almost exactly such q stream as the |
lore western stream is laid down In Me-
se's map of 1878.
In his second map (of 1929 he corrected
be mistake of running the headwatrrs OF
be Canadian into branch OF Red River,