San Antonio daily light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1886-1907, 1889-12-13
UNCLE SAM VERSUS TEXAS.

1
that territory becomes of increasing
Importance. All attempts heretofore
made to settle this much discussed
point, as to where the Crue line be-
tween Texas and the Indian Terrific
ry runs, have been without result.
Uncle Sam continues to claim the
south fork of the Red river as the
true boundary and that Greer county
is part of the Indian Territory and
so included in the public lands which
will some day be opened for settle
ment by actual homesteaders. On
the other hand, Texas, claiming the
north fork of the Red river as that
| which was meant and understood
when the old boundaries of the re-
public were established, includes
Greer county among the coun-
ties of the Lone Star State,
exercises Jurisdiction over the
same, denies the rights claimed by the
national government and holds pos
session. 1t will be remembered that
two years since this question was sub
mitted to boundary commission in
which Texas and the United States
were equally represented and that a
mass of testimony was taken by the
commission and laid before congress.
This testimony was never made the
basis of judgment, the commission
making no recommendations and con-
gress taking no specific action. There
being no agreement among the COM
missioners, no recommendation to
congress and no action by congress,
matters remained as they were. The
Texas commissioners maintained the
Texas view and stood out for the
north fork of the boundary; the Uni
ted States commissioners stood pat for
the south fork boundary and claimed
Greer county for the national domain.
This is the condition ofatfairs at pres
ent, and in order finally to dispose of
the matter and set this much dis
cussed and vexed question forever at
rest Senator Coke has introduced
bill before congress. The bill author
ICES the attorney general of the
United States to bring suit in equity
against the state of Texas for the pos
session of Greer county, and sets
forth the claim of the United States
to the territory in dispute. In the
bill it is also provided that the court
shall take cognizance of the testimony
taken by the boundary commission
and consider it part of the evidence
in the case. 1t is the intent of the
bill to bring the matter to final de-
termination without delay and the
attorney general is accordingly in
structed to bring suit at once. 1t
is very probable therefore that
the end of this matter will be
reached before a very great while.
1t is now about thirty years since
this question was sprung, and during
that time several Intellectual attempts
have been made to effect settlement.
There does not appear to be any way
of arriving at solution of it other
wise than through the courts. Texas
certainly will not abate her claim to
lands so long included in her territory,
and the National government shows
no disposition to yield it's claim.
Considerably larger in its area than
Bexar county, it is a possession not
to be despised, and Texas has shown
proper regard for her interests in
refusing to surrender it without
cause. AS the boundary commission
could not agree upon the facts, it is
not to be expected than any evidence
outside of the courts will be accepted
ALL the same the LIGHT believes in
| the validity of the claim of Texas
and will await the issue of
proceedings in the court in the firm
| belief that the Lone Star state will
continue to hold the territory over
which she has so long exercised
jurisdiction. 1t is better, however,
that the matter be settled and settled
now, as every year that settlement is
delayed only complicates matters
and may lead TO vexatious actions at
law to settle titles. On the whole it
is we'll that the case is in the courts.
1t will be better when it comes out of