New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1910-04-18
WHO OWNS Ell PASO LAND?
Rio Grande's Shifting Channel
Raises Diplomatic Question.
MANY MILLIONS INVOLVED
Controversy Over Whether Add
ed Territory Was Acquired
by Erosion or Accretion.

Washington, April 1.-THE shifting chan
nel OF the Rio Grande is responsible
for the present diplomatic controversy over
the question whether the extreme southern
section, valued at several million dollars.
Of the city of FL Paso. Tex. on the MeXi-
can frontier does not really belong on the
Mexican side OF the boundary line The
land involved. which is known locally and
in the State Department as the Chamizal
zone. and over which the United States has
always exercised jurisdiction. is about one
and one-half miles long and about five
blocks vide. IL contains a large number OF
residences. owned and occupied principally
by Mexicans.
El Paso never had considered the MeXi-
can claims seriously until the meeting Of
President Taft and President Diaz in FL
Paso year ago. when Il was agreed that
the disputed territory for that particular
occasion should be regarded as neutral
zone. The citizens of FL Paso regarded this
agreement as Of the highest consequence, I'm
that Il tended to recognize that Mexico
might have claim to the territory and
steps Immediately were taken TO obtain a
settlement of the whole matter, as real es-
tate values in the section involved we're be-
coming seriously affected.
Citizens Of FL Paso, including the Mayor
Of the city. visited the State Department
some weeks ago and urged Secretary Knox
TO dispose OF the questions at issue as soon
as possible. representing that the delay in
fixing this bit of international boundary had
already depressed the value Of property
lying within the zone. Secretary Knox
gave assurances that he would take up the
matter Immediately with Mexico. and II
hat
reached within the next few weeks.
The treaty of peace with Mexico. which
followed the war Of 1si6-4s in fixing the
boundary along the Texas frontier. pro-
vlded that the channel Of the Rio Grande
should be the boundary line but in supple
mentarv boundary conventions. essentially
those OF 1854 and 1852. the fact was recog-
nized that the Rio Grande River WAS ex-
tremely ickle regarding keeping its origi-
nal course. and il was agreed that. I'm the
case Of a change I'm the course Of the river
by accretion. the territory gained by either
country Should remain in the country into
which II had been thrown, but in case of a
change by erosion, the territory involved
should remain the property Of the country
within whose borders II originally WAS
II il contended. on behalf OF Mexico, that
the river ran on the Texas side of the dis
puted territory as late as 1852 and this con-
tention is believed To have beer recognized
by the International Boundary Commission.
which has so entered 1t on its maps and
records. Since that time. however. the
channel o. the river has changed it's course.
but whether by gradually wearing away
the Mexican bank ana adding the sand 10
the Texas side or by taking an entirely
ne~ course is the question now al issue.
Up 10 few years ago Mexico seemed
10 have acquiesced In the exercise by the
United States of Jurisdiction over the
territory now in dispute. but at that time