New-York tribune., 1885-03-21

"a A.. x.,,ort of tbe Consul-General at hatamorcs
4, ragard 10 the Rio Grande boundary petweeh 'n0
limited States and Mexico, which shows in =, 's
,,iyabIe manner the need OF estabilsninga iaio IN
.ccordar. sc-with precedent and intcrnaeohsa 10"
-. .,s,dng such cases / have the honor to be-
air. your obedent servant
FREp'K T. FRELINGHuYsEN.
n. I.,, Miller. Chairman of the Committee
on Foreign Relations.
CoSsur.ArE-GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES
oo,, u,T,NoEas oT AmES,cAb Dec. 30, 1884
SIR In my No. 1s9 Of MAY last sIana HsaS WING in
tpa he'd az the Rio Grande. near Roma, Iexas
Shs titles 70 said island are, In dispute
S,hs natiouaity Of said island has also been
sabeet Of discussion & In my hic,gd no aS To the
United states and quoted from the report Oh 'ng
Boundary Commission to prove the statement G,srn !
am reliably informed that the meHcaH To1;dsa the
island was so located and adjudicated Dy one
boundary Commission of 1888 NY & inlTrRaS' WnTicn
added that The r,ss aGsy stase That the Department
Of 81 ate at Washington held Una. Inc po .hat az
followed the changes OF the river peu, anu tnd pt,Io
long AZ that opinion obtained there was put nrtie
nrospecf of getting this question settled. s nls
question Is of such Importance, lncludipg as ~ uoo
other localities along the river boundary, Ihae !
yenture 10 place the matter before the Department
From above El Paso down to its mouth tne pea
In bigh water the channel often changes making
for itself a new channel and cutting of consider
able sections from one slde ana Ieavlne rrad om.,
on the other bank These changes have trahsierIeu
portiops several miles long containing often nun
dreds of acres of valuable land. 10 snow you uioIo
plainly the p Ul rag t5ere are well grounded
fears that the current OF the fiVer WI" ou' "''o'''
and r..v,, n, Fort BROWN
on the Mexican side ,,..,so
D Throw MataInoros on the Mexican side
2. Go cut at Boco Chica. seven miles from bag
dad. throwing an rregularly shaped portion' some
seven by len miles on TO the Mexican side
a C;o ont through the Arroyo Colorado leaving
Santa Maria, Brownsville Point lsaoei, aha z;ooO
s1nare miles of this lower valley ON the Mexican
Cut off half or the whole of the Mexican town
of Paso del Norte leaving 1t on the American oaK
a Wakinr changes at different points which Will
throw a ranch two ranches, or smaller portions Oh
land TO the opposite bank. o5 H., .ba n.xt
Now. il is not reasonable to presume that resi-
dents along such boundary VIII assent 10 .ne % iues
homes shall vary with with so variable line; ~
is not practicable right. nor in accord WIN tne
PROVISIONS Of the treaty & nS ts4o sa ATce t'S w
the boundary line between the two Republics shall
commence in the Gulf Of Mexico opPSSsite Ss ,1s the
mouth S SsSst the G sSascS should have than
one branch empyng directly into the sea from thence
ne Where has more than to the point whore it
strikes the southern boundary OF New-Mexlco etc
e In order to designate the southern boundary with
due which shah snow the limits Of both Republics
as described In the present article commission snan
meet and proceed to run ana marx M tps p sfu de NSr
(Rio Grande):" ,,on. q, ,,o,r
operaions and the result agreed upon by them shall ne
deemed part of this treaty. Ana no change
shall be made" etc.
Page s5 of the report of Major Emery, the Amer
lean Commissioner XXXIVth Congress, first ses-
sion, Ex. Doc. 135 House OF Representatives
states:
"one Of the most important Of our duties Was o TO
determine TO which side the islands in the Rio Bravo
belonged
"Islands Nos. 12 and 49, between Ringgold Barracks
and Roma, both fall to the United States.
Hs goes On TO state that Island No. 13, "Beaver
JsandD (Isla del Castorl, divided the rlver into
three channels and that the survey and actuai nav
igation showed that the true channel was nexi 20
tbe Mexican side and was hence located as the
frue boundary lie adds that the allotment was
made upon the condition of things as they then e1-
isfed
Thus far | have given the terms of the treaty, OF
the commission therein provided, and the local cur
eacenr ms regards a gradual accretion or degIada-
tion, the boundary line iSwneTe tle HeH aeepoo' %
channel Of the river was when f oosN ~ Noysmber IL
IS5G Mr. Caleb Cushing, then Attorhey-UehtenId tni'
gave an opinion, addressed to Hon. Robert McCiei-
fsn Secretary of the Interior, In regard 10 Ihis
rnas,ion i nuote from his decision as follows:
aR, ON the other hand If, deserting its original bed
tho river forces for itself new channel IN % %
tion then the nation through whose terflory tho
fhns breaks its way suffers Injury by the loss OF
greater than the benefit OF retaining the ha.on , az
boundary and that boundary remains In the cepue o
'ne ToS D truth. lust as stone pillar constitutes
,,nIsry NOT because II is stone, but because or the
place I'm which il stands, 80 river ia made tne is oi
naons no. So% hut because ii is water flowing
in given channel and within given banks, winch are inc
re e INC received rule Of the law of nations this
point as laid down by all the writer's OF authority
The fnll text of Mr. Cushing's opinion. which IS
positive as to the points a90ge rd% Al@eda psre
cho Publico tom. !, d. 1919: AS the river be-
longs to the two nations so also the Tlver-Dea II
by chance il becomes dry is divided thehl as pro-
prietors": and Derecho International, tom. L, p.
So: "When a river changes its course, directing
its currents through the teTrtSfy OF Que os drU
remains the property OF the State OF STATES 10
which the river belonged that being retained asthe
limit between the two nations" Is the Puoic law
laws of the United States and Mexics. inns
opinion was distinctly approved by secretary
Seward in communication 10 Mr. Romero Mexican
Minister under date of February o, 1867 ssee Part
2, Diplomatic Correspondence, 1867 page oZol'
and approved by Mr. Romero February u, 1868.
Int In the opinion of Mr.. Cushing he holds that
gradual accretIOns fall to the side receiving tne
same dhis Is of deter@ining Just
where Is the dividing line between gradual accre-
tion and q positive change OF the river bed. Inns
is very difficult question. Sometimes tho river
will cut away one foot per hour from one bank, q
part or all of which accrues to the opposite pank'
and In the current holds for two OF more
waters may make or lose many rods of valuable
land and cause positive change IN the bed OF the
river. Rio Grande City and III Paso have each
gained largely by changes which, while perhaps
gradual have nevertheless been quite considerable
In quantity and value, and by means OF
radically changed at those points. The value
of the property which is involved IN this boundary
question may easily reach million dollars, and
lts value wifi rapidly increase from year TO year.
Tins question should be settled, and il can be by
the decision of tse Department to adhere TO the
boundary as located III 1888. 1 have previously
reported in favor of relocating this lower boundary,