Iron County news. [volume] (Hurley, Wis.) 1913-1950, 1921-04-23
WISCONSIN READY TO FIGHT
MlCHIGAN'S BOUNDARY CLAIM
Michigan's Claim to Land in the Hur.
ley District Not Taken Very Ser
iOusly at State Capitol.

The claim of Michigan to large
and valuable area in the Hurley
district, set forth in legislative
action at Lansing. has not made
much of an impression in the
Badger capitol. Officials are in
terested and should a serious at
tempt be made to enforce it, Wis
consin will be ready with historical
and survey records en- which its
case will be based. Watchful
waiting is the word thus far.
81 do not see that Michigan has
a ghost of show to make good
this claim, said E. F. Bean, as
sistant state geologist whose work
as surveyor has made him
familiar with the records THE
boundary is part of the enabling
act under which Wisconsin was
admitted. That act was passed by
congress, and if it is changed, it
must be changed by congress-.
AREA WORTH $40, 900, 900
Michigan has already annexed
the disputed territory by consitu-
tional amendment. According to
its constitution of 1918, Michigan
includes about 200 square miles of
territory over which Wisconsin
now exercises jurisdiction. This
area, which includes the city of
Hurley and the iron mines lying
to the west on the Gogebic range,
is valued at about $40. 600, 900.
1t is juicy plum for the tax
gatherer.
The constitutional claim waseffect-
ed through the urgency of the late
Peter White, Marquette, whose
historical researches led him to the
conclusion that Michigan was en-
titled to this territory. He interest
ed Clarence Burton, Detroit, chair
man of the committee on boundaries
in the constitutional convention.
Mr.. Burton brought in a report
asserting that the Michigan bound
airy is marked by the westerly
branch of the Montreal river to
Island lake.
The description in the old Michi-
gan constitution fixed the boundary
as the middle of the Montreal river
to the headwaters thereof. The riv-
er here referred to is now known as
the eastern branch of the Montreal.
To adopt the western branch of the
river would slice a nice little tri.
angle from Wisconsin.
Nl%A4M LA -FROOt AASh
Badger officials and historians
claim law-proof case with respect
to the Montreal river boundary.
They say until recently there was
no western branch of the Montreal
river. When the surveys and map.
were made, and when congress
created this state there was but
one Montreal river which is the
one now dividing the states.
The stream now known as the
western branch of the Montreal
was then known as the Gogogashu-
gun. 1t was so known as late as
1885, as is shown by the field notes
of the late DR.. c. R. Van Hise.
who traversed that country as a
member of the geological survey in
June of that year. The Van Hise
| field notes, as we'll as those of other
surveyors ard map makers, show
that this stream was not regarded
as the Montreal river, bot as a
branch, with a definite name of its
own. The difficult Indian name
which means Rocking Bridge"
probably caused settlers in recent
years to call it the Western Mon
treal. No one here thinks Wis.
cousin will lose its title through
this accidental change in a river s
name, long after the states and
other boundaries were created.
The stream is designated as the
Gogogashugun in the United States
reports and in the geological sur