Santa Fe new Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1898-1951, 1904-01-08
NEW MEXICO
TEXAS BORDER
An Attempt to Rob This Territory
of Over Two Hundred
Square Miles.
ERRONEOUS SURVEY
1t Places the Texas Boundary Two
Miles Too Far to the
West.

The question of the Texas-New Mex
leo boundary which Texas is bringing
to the front by bill introduced at the
last session of Congress by Represent
ative Stephens, the object of the meas
ure being to rob New Mexico of a.
strip of land over two miles wide on
it's eastern border, is ably discussed in
the following letter to Delegate B. S.
Rodey, which sets forth not only the
injustice but also the falsity of the
Texas claim.
To the Hon. Bernard S. Rodey, Dele
gate in Congress, Washington, D. c.
In reference to H. r. No. 10, Fifty
eighth Congress, first session, intro
duced by Representative Stephens of
Texas, on November 8, 1903, I desire
respectfully to call your attention to
the following:
First-To the organic act establish
ing the Territory of New Mexico, ap-
proved September 30 1850 where it is
provided that the boundary line, be-
tween Texas and New Mexico, shall be
the meridian 103 degrees west from
Greenwich, and that the state of Tex
as, shall cede to the United States, all
her claim to the Territory, exterior to
that meridian and that in the consid-
GRAFTON of her so doing the United
States shall pay to the state of Texas,
the sum of $10,0OO,O00
Second-That Texas has received
from the United States, the whole of
the said sum.
Third-That according to the sur
vey, known as Chaney's survey of
1881, the Clark survey of 1S59-60 was
found to be two miles and 35 chains
west of the true 103d meridian see
bulletin 1874, Geological Survey, pages
% and 20, that according to Levi S.
Peston's survey in 1890, the Clark sur
vey was found to be, two miles and IA
chains west of the true 103d meridian.
Fourth-That the survey made by
Author D. Kidder in matter of the es-
tablishment of the true Tooth meridian
with Red River. further shows and
confirms the fact that the Clark sur
vey is approximately two miles west
or the true 1O3d meridian.
Fifth-That but few of the monu-
ments marking the line surveyed by
Clark in 1859-6O can be now certainly
located
Sixth-That the allegation in the
said H. r. No. 10, that the Clark sur
vey, has been approved by the United
States, and the legislature of the
state of Texas, and confirmed by the
surveyors of the state of Texas, is
clearly an error; in SO far as least as
the United States is concerned This
allegated act of confirmation is found
in chapter SAP, act Of Fifty-third Con-
gress, second session, and reference
thereto, shows that the said act is a
general appropriation measure, and
that the words, "is hereby confirmed"
to the said act, have no logi-
cal connection, and could under no
construction be construed as to mean
an intended confirmation of the Clark
survey; that the said words are
addenda or else were ap-
pended surreptitiously for the purpose
Of aiding possible confirmatory con-
struction and approval of the Clark
survey.
Seventh-A joint resolution based
upon this alleged confirmation act,
was enacted by the Texas legislature
in March, 1891; an examination of this
Joint resolution, leaves the examiner
to believe, that the whole matter was
and done for purpose
Eighth-That even if the Congress
If the United States has been tricked
nto confirmation of the Clark sur
7ey, it is not thereby bound that hav-
ng paid consideration for the re-
ease of her claim of lands lying west
If the true 1O3d meridian, Texas can
lot justly retain that consideration
md at the same time retain the land.
Ninth-That the only way in which
ustice may be done in the matter is
o provide for and to have the true
O3d meridian established. surveyed.
md monumented as the boundary line.