The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1883-10-04
THE BEGINNING OF A SETTLE
MENT,

have not been long ago issued OF
Greer county locations, has tended
to shake confidence in the right OF
Texas to the disputed soil. THE
STATESMAN has always held that this
land rightfully belonged to Texas, and
it has, time and again, presented proof
of the very strongest sort in support
of its position. The only shadow of a
claim that the United States has to
this territory is based upon the unau-
thorized action of two surveys, named
Jones and Brown, who had a contract
with the commissioner of Indian af-
fairs to do some surveying in the In
dian Territory in 1859. They crossed
Red River into the State of Texas and
established the initial monument OF
the boundary line between the
United States and Texas, on the
Prairie-Dogtown river, a stream
wholly within the State of Texas.
The commissioner, as indisputably ap-
pe;'rS, lad no power from the Federal
government, nor from the State
of I.Xls, to establish this
boundary line, and as a matter
of course, he could delegate no
such authority to Jones and Brown
Hence their task was self-imposed, il
legal and not binding; and, yet, the
commissioner of the federal land
Office, in his letter of May 10,
1877, formulates the claim
of the United States upon this initial
monument, thus erected, to establish
a claim to Greer county. Jones and
Brown, it seems, acted entirely upon
the idea that the Prairie-Dogtown
river, having wider channel at high
water than other tributaries, must be
the identical Red River, mentioned in
the treaty of the 22d of February,
1919, and the identical Red River as
laid down on Melish's map, improved
20 LIST Of January, 1918. A gentleman,
who has carefully observed the region
says, that owing to the peculiar
formation of the country through
which it passes the trairie-Dogtown
river, from the initial monument to
its junction with Red River, has a
tremendous river bed, in many places
having no banks, and consequently, in
high rises covering the praries and
producing an immense sheet of water.
The bed of this stream is, in
places, twice as wide as the bed of
the Red River at Denison, after having
received the waters Of all its tributa-
ries. But this wide channel is said to
be all that claims for it the distinction
of river, since it is dry at it's month
the greater portion of the year, and
never runs except for few days after
heavy rains. 1t is in truth but nat
ural conveyance to the Red River for
a great watershed. EX-Gov. Pease
at one time gave his impressions as to
the boundary line between Texas and
the Indian Territory. He said:
The Prairie-Dogtown fork, as before
stated, is not laid down on Melishs
map, and the first notice that is to be
found Of it, in print, is in Capt. Mar
cy's report of his exploration of road
from Fort Smith to Santa Fe, in 1849,
more than thirty years after the con-
clusion Of the treaty Of 1919. He re-
turned from that exploration by way
of the head waters of the Colorado
and Brazos rivers, and while encamped
on the head waters of the latter, he
says, in his report, page 217: about
thirty miles nor = of our camp there
is sharp mould visible from the
hills aUcut here, and Beaver
(his IEdian guide) tells me that
directly at the foot of this mound
runs the Big Wichita. one of the
principal tributaries to Red River, and
that thirty miles in northwest
course from that mound the Red
river forks; one branch coming in
homo, or "Prairie-Dogtown river"
a round mound upon the stream,
top of it. This branch rises in the
Llano Estacado. The other, or north
ern branch, is the principal stream,
which rises in the salt plains, near the
head of Dry river"
The report doubtless led to the sub
sequent exploration by Capt. Marcy
in 1852, of the head waters of Red
River. when the Prairie-Dogtown fork
was first discovered and explored by
civilized man and laid down on a
map. 1t then had name, distinct
from that of Red River, given to it
long previous by the Indians, and it
is still more generally known on the
maps of the country as "Prairie-Dog-
town river" than as the South fork
of Red River" a designation that Capt.
Marcy gave it.
With what propriety can it now be
claimed, that river which was not
delineated on any map of the country
at the time that boundary treaty was
concluded, and which was not known
, to, and not discovered by, civilized
man until more than thirty years after
the date of that treaty, is the Red
River, designated by it as part of the
boundary between Spain and the
United States? When, if this claim
is to be allowed, it will deprive Texas
of, and give to the United States the
most valuable and important part OF
the country watered by the Upper
Red River, which, by Melish's map is
shown to be entirely within the linn
) its of Texas.
, The surveyors, in their informal
work, were certainly guided by ig
> norance. They could never have
! even read the treaty Of 1918, nor eX-
! amined the map of Melish, improved
, to 1918, or they could not have
stultifed themselves by placing
an initial monument at thu
point they did. The treaty makes
; Red River the boundary line from
q about the oath meridian to the 100tl
: meridian, west, from London, not thu
: Red River as laid down on the map
4 of the present day, but as laid dowI
a onMelish's map, improved to the LIST Of
January. 1918. At THAT early day it wa
not known to biographies that sucl
h streams as the Wichita and the Cana
9 dian rivers existed, and they ar
/ blended with the Red River as lail
q down on Melish's map of 1918. Thi
It is evident from the fact that Red Rive
Il is laid down as rising in the exac
r locality of the source of the Cana
q dian, north of the 47th parable
e and west of the 105th meri
2. dian, with no stream betweel
e it and the Arkansas river. The tres
'. ty, therefore, absolutely requires tn
J. boundary line to run as near the Al
IS kansas river as Red River, or as nea