USA > Louisiana > The province and the states, a history of the province of Louisiana under France and Spain, and of the territories and states of the United States formed therefrom, Vol. II > Part 43
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48
In 1831, bills were presented to enable the Territories of Mich- igan and Arkansas to draft constitutions and form governments
.
,
.
.
428
THE PROVINCE AND THE STATES.
with the view to their admission into the Union. It had become recognized as the custom to admit two states at the same time- one from the North and one from the South, the intention being to keep the representation of the two parties in congress in the same proportion. With this idea in view, when a motion was made in the United States senate to table the resolution to admit Arkansas, the bill to admit Michigan was dropped by general acquiescence. The following is from the senate proceedings of May 12, 1834: "The Senate resumed, as in committee of the whole, the bill to authorize the people of the Territory of Arkan- sas to form a constitution and State Government, and for the admission of such State into the Union upon an equal footing with the original States in all respects whatsoever ; and on motion of Mr. Ewing (of Ohio) that it be laid on the table: your 22, nays 20." It was a close party vote, the Democracy voting for the tabling of the resolution. The following is from the sen- ate proceedings of March 22, 1836: "Mr. Buchanan, from the select committee to whom was referred the memorial of the Ter- ritory of Arkansas, on the subject, reported a bill to provide for the admission of Arkansas into the States of the Union, which was read and ordered to a second reading." The bill was again considered April 3, 1836. "On motion of Mr. White, of Tennessee, the bill was so amended as to provide more effectu- ally against any difficulties as to the boundary with the west- ern Cherokees." After some debate, the bilt was ordered engrossed for a third reading.
On April 4th the bill came up for a third reading The seas and mays were ordered, and the various features of the hill well discussed. Among other things, Mr. Benton, of Missouri, said : "It is worthy of notice that on the presentation of these two great questions ( the admission of Michigan and Arkansas), those gentlemen who had charge of them were so slightly affected by the exertions that had been made to disturb and ulcerate the public mind on the subject of slavery, as to put them in the hands of Senators who might be supposed to entertain opinions on that subject different from those held by the States whose interests they were charged with. Thus, the people of Arkansas had put their application into the hands of a gentleman rep- resenting a non-slaveholding State; and the people of Michigan had put their application into the hands of a Senator (himself ) coming from a State where the institutions of slavery existed." But his conclusion that the agitation of the slavery question had died out was wholly wrong, as shown by subsequent events. The reason that the subject of slavery was not discussed upon
429
TERRITORIAL AND STATE BOUNDARIES.
the admission of Arkansas was because both parties considered the question to have been settled by the Missouri compromise of 1820. Several of the senators opposed the admission of both Michigan and Arkansas on the ground that their proceedings in preparing constitutions, forming state governments, and demanding admission into the Union, without the previous con- sent of congress, were irregular and revolutionary. On the final passage of the bill the vote stood : yeas 31, nay's 6, the latter being Messrs. Clay, Knight, Porter, Prentiss, Robbins and Swift. The boundaries of the new state were as follows: "Beginning in the middle of the main channel of the Mississippi river, on the par- allel of thirty-six degrees of north latitude; running from thence west with the said parallel of latitude to the St. Francis river; thence up the middle of the main channel of said river to the parallel of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes north; from thence west to the southwest corner of the State of Missouri ; and from thence to be bounded on the west to the north bank of Red river by the 'lines described in the first article of the treaty made between . the United States and the Cherokee nation of Indians west of the Mississippi, on the 26th day of May, 1828;' and to be bounded on the south side by Red river and the Mexican boundary line, to the northwest corner of the State of Louisiana ; thence cast with the Louisiana State line to the middle of the main channel of the Mississippi river ; thence up the middle of the main chan- nel of the said river to the thirty-sixth degree of north latitude, the point of beginning."
Article ] of the treaty of May 26, 1828, between the Cherokee Indians and the United States, was as follow : "The western boundary of Arkansas shall be, and the same is hardly daniel, viz: A line shall be run, commencing on Red river at the point where the eastern Choctaw line strikes said river and inn due north with said line to the river Arkansas, thence in a direct line to the southwest corner of Missouri." The Choctaw line referred to above had been defined January 20, 1825, as follows: "Begin- ning on the Arkansas river one hundred spaces cast of Fort Smith and running thence due south to Red river ; it being understood that this line shall constitute and remain the permanent bound- ary between the United States and the Choctaws." In the con- stitution of the state and in subsequent statutes the boundaries have been variously described, but do not vagy as to territory. The constitution of 1836 gave the western boundary as fol- lows: "thence to be bounded on the west to the north bank of Red river, as by acts of Congress and treaties heret store delin- ing the western limits of the Territory of Arkansas." The coll-
.
430
THE PROVINCE AND THE STATES.
stitution of 1861 specified the following boundaries: "Thence to be bounded on the west to the north bank of Red river as by acts of Congress and the treaties heretofore defining the western him- its of the Territory of Arkansas." These descriptions meant the boundary as it is at present. The constitutions of IS68 and 1874 did not vary the limits.
By resolution of February 11, 1824, the house of representatives asked the secretary of war, John C. Calhoun, whether the western boundary of Arkansas Territory had been surveyed as provided in the act of March 3, 1823. Mr. Calhoun replied that "the line referred to by the resolution of the House has not been run. Shortly after the termination of the last session of Congress, Gen. Thomas linds, of Mississippi and Mr. William Woodward, of the Arkansas Territory, were appointed commissioners to hold a treaty with the Choctaw Indians for the purpose of carrying into effect the provisions of the act abovementioned ; and communica- tions were addressed to them by this Department, notifying them of their appointment and enclosing instructions for their govern- ment. The communication for General Hinds ( who was directed to make the principal arrangement for the treaty), it appears never reached him, owing to some failure of the mails, or other cause, unknown to this Department ; that for Mr. Woodward was received by him, of which, however, this Department has only been apprised since the meeting of Congress. Owing to these causes, the proposed treaty with the Choctaws was not held; and consequently the line which depended on the arrangement to be made by the treaty could not be run."
On the 30th of December, 1831. Mr. Sevier, dels, de from the Territory of Arkansas, introduced in the house the following: "Resolved, That the President of the United States be requested (if not deemed incompatible with the public interests) to negoti- ate with Spain for her right and title to the country lying between the Sabine and Red rivers in Arkansas Territory." In support of this resolution, he said in part, "There is a considerable tract of country lying north of the Sabine and south of Red river, upon which many of our citizens have resided for years; a country of which we have had the undisturbed possession and over which we still exercise jurisdiction, that will in all probability, be lost to us forever, if the boundary line designated by the treaty of 1810) between this Government and Spain should be permanently established. I believe Spain to be the rightful owner of this tract of country; and of that Government I presume we can obtain it for a mere trifle. It is time, Mexico claims this country, but I ask what evidence has she of her title? Has she purchased
-
431
TERRITORIAL AND STATE BOUNDARIES.
it? Hlas she conquered it ? Mexico never revolution- ized the country north of the Sabine ; she never marched a soldier into it ; not has she ever given a dollar for it. Our citizens have held the undisturbed possession of this country from 1866 down to the present day. It is true we ceded it to Spain in 1819 for which she gave us the Floridas. Has Spain ever parted with her right acquired by that treaty?" He continued to the same effect, showing that the Mexican revolutionists had neither con- quered, taken possession of, nor bought that tract of country from Spain, and therefore it was still the property of the latter and should at once he bought by the United States But no action seems to have been taken upon his suggestion.
Mr. Adams, on June 6, 1836, presented in the house of repre- sentatives twenty-two memorials and remonstrances to the admi: - sion of Arkansas into the Union, from Massachusetts, Pennsyl- vania and Ohio, on the ground of the proposed establishment of slavery in the new state. Mr. Vinton, of Ohio, moved the follow - ing amendment to an act supplementary to an act for the admis- . sion of the State of Arkansas into the Union, etc. : "That the 8th section of an ordinance passed by the convention of delegates at Little Rock, assembled for the purpose of making a constitution for the State of Arkansas, which is in the following words: All that section of country lying west of the western boundary of the State of Arkansas, which was formerly part of the Territory of Arkansas, under the provisions of an act of Congress, approved the 26th day of May, 1821, entitled, "An act to fix the western boundary of the Territory of Arkansas," and which was coded by the United States to the Clarolive and Choctay Inder. What ever the Indian title shall be extingu bed to the same, hall te attached to, and form a part of, the State of Arkansas; and when the said Indian title shall be extinguished, the western boundary of the said state shall be in accordance with the pro- visions of the said act of Congress,' be, and the same is hereby, rejected." The reason for this motion was stated to be the impropriety, while just ceding in perpetuity the territory to the Indians, of providing for its eventual absorption by the United States. This motion was not adopted, but other equivalent changes were made which satisfied the objector.
The act of March 3, 1875, provided "that the boundary line between the State of Arkansas and the Indian country, as ofig- inally surveyed and marked, and upon which the lines of the sun - veys of the public lunds in the State of Arkansas were closed, be. and the same is hereby, declared to be the permanent boundary line between the said State of Arkansas and the Indian country."
.
1
.
-
1
432
TILL: PROVINCE AND THE STATES.
Section 2 provided that the line should be retraced and re-marked, "and if the original line, when retraced, shall be found to differ in any respect from what the boundary line would be if run m accordance with the provisions of the treaties establishing the cast- ern boundary line of the Choctaw and Chickasaw nations, then the surveyors shall note such variations and compute the area of the land which in that case would be taken from the State of Arkansas or the Indian country, as the case may be, and the Sec- retary of the Interior shall also cause any monuments set up in any former survey indicating any line at variance with the survey provided for in this act to be obliterated."
In February, 1879, the commissioner of public lands reported that the boundary between Arkansas and the Indian territory, which had been declared by the art of March 3, 1875, to be the permanent line "varied materially from the boundary described in the treaty with the Choctaws of January 20, 1825, and with the Cherokees of May 6, 1828." It had been found that the line run by the old surveyors between Arkansas and the Indian country from a point "one hundred paces cast of Fort Smith" diverged considerably to the west of a due south line, and as a consequence had located the boundary too far to the westward, to the injury of the Indians. The commissioner reported that there had thus been two thousand five hundred and thirty-nine and fifty-four one hundredths acres taken wrongfully from the Cherokees, and one hundred and thirty-seven thousand five hundred and twelve one hundredths acres wrongfully taken from the Choctaws, or a total of one hundred and forty thousand and thirty nine and sixty -ix one hundredths from the two nations. An evenit com of the sales for this tract showed that only one hundred and thirty -four thousand one hundred and forty seven and eighty nine one hun- dredths acres had been disposed of, leaving considerable of a dis- crepancy. It was recommended that the Indians should be paid for the land thus wrongfully taken by the goverment.
On the 29th of December, 1831, Mr. Bynum, of North Carolina, introduced in the house the following: "That the Executive be requested to be caused to be laid before this House, as soon as practicable, such information in relation to the relative positions of the province of Texas, one of the United Province of the Republic of Mexico, and the Government of the United States of North America, as may be in possession of either of the depart. ments, not deemed incompatible with the interests of either of the two Governments ; ako what progress has been made in distin- guishing the boundary lines between this Government and the Republic of Mexico which were to be run in conformity with the
433
TERRITORIAL AND ST.ITE BOUNDARIES.
.
stipulations made and entered into between the Government of Spain and that of the United States, as ratified by the latter in Congress on the 2nd of February, 1810. Also, whether any sub- sequent relations have been entered into between the commis- sioners of this and the Government of Mexico, to carry into exe- ention the conditions of the above mentioned stipulations posterior to the recognition of the latter Government as an independent republic."
The republic of Texas, by act of December 19, 1836, declared its boundaries to be as follows: "Beginning at the month of the Sabine river and running west along the Gulf of Mexico three leagnes from land to the month of the Ris Grande, thence up the principal stream of said river to its source, thence due north to the forty-second degree of north latitude, thenve along the bound- ary line as defined in the treaty between the United States and Spain to the beginning." It should be observed that by the treaty of January 12, 1828, between the United States of America and . the United Mexican States the limits between the two countries were also declared to be the same as those established in IS19 between Spain and the United States.
During the debate on the recognition of Texas in the senate in May, 1836, Mr. Walker, of Mississippi, said, "Look at the maps and observe the extraordinary corners and angles of our procent boundary -- that boundary, by the treaty of 1819, by which Texas was sacrificed ; by which the valley of Mississippi was dismen- bered; by which the great territories of the Mississippi, the Arkansas for hundreds of miles, and the Red river for at themar .! miles were virtually surrendered to Spain; In which the right ' navigate the Mississippi was in fact coded to spam and a foreign Power placed on Red river within three days of New Orleans : a treaty by which the most valuable territory and the most important harbors on the Gulf of Mexico were given up, an enemy placed within a few hours sail of New Orleans, and the command of the Gulf abandoned ; a treaty by which five or sis States (in the prospective) were torn from the banner of the American Union." There can be no doubt that many citizens of the United States looked upon the relinquishment of the upper Red river and the upper Arkansas river countries as an unwarranted loss to the United States. These rivers from their months to their sommers belonged to the Mississippi river basin, to which France had an undisputed title before the surrender of Louisiana to Spain in 1762-3. The retrocession of a did not change these hounds. They passed to the United States in 1803. But an extension of 11-28
434
THE PROVINCE AND THE STATES.
the limits of the United States to the sources of the Red and the Arkansas rivers would carry the western boundary to within a few miles of Santa Fe, the capital of the Spanish province of New Mexico. The Spanish ambassador protested against such a proceeding, and his argument was used against him when he demanded the extension of Texas to the eastward of the Sabine, because it would place the eastern boundary of Texas, then a province of Mexico, within a few miles of New Orleans. But it was a time of mutual concessions and sacrifices. The United States, in order to gain at the Sabine and in West Florida, sacri- fixed the upper Red river and the upper Arkansas river countries. But Mr. Walker was right as regards the title of the United States to that upper country. It belonged to the Uinted States from 1803 to 1819.
On the 17th of May, 1836, Mr. Adams, of Massachusetts, intro- duced the following in the house: "Resolved, That the Press- dent of the United States be requested to communicate to this House, if not incompatible with the public interest, copies of any overture made since the third of March, 1820, by his authority to the Government of the United Mexican States for the acquisition by the United States of any portion of the territory of Mexico; and copies of all correspondence between the two Governments relating thereto, and upon any question of boundary existing between the United States and Mexico."
A convention was concluded between the United States and the government of Texas in April, 1838, one of the provisions of which specified that the boundary between the two contra- should be marked and defined. Congress be act . proved Ju. mary 11, 1839, provided for the appointment of surveyor, coll- missioner and clerk, and appropriated the sum of ten thousand dollars to defray the expenses on the part of the United States.
When Texas was annexed to the United States in 18.15. there was secured, in addition to its present territory, all of New Mex- ico east of the Rio Grande, the public land strip, the present south- western corner of Kansas, a large irregular strip extending entirely across the middle of Colorado, and a tract nearly square in the southern part of Wyoming. I was seen by congress that the bounds of Texas as a whole were too large for one state, whereupon congress required the cession to the United States of all that part of Texas north of the parallel of thirty six degrees and thirty minutes of north latitude as a condition precedent before the admission would be agreed to. The question of slavery was also considered in this requirement. Texas was conceded the right to form as many as four states out of her
435
TERRITORIAL AND STATE BOUNDARIES.
remaining territory. It was afterward claimed that the agree- ment for the formation of these four states was made before that portion of Texas north of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes was cut off, and that therefore, she was entitled to form but three states out of her remaining territory. This seems to have been the fact, although the two transactions were made about the same time.
The following act was passed by congress September 9, 1850 : "That the following propositions shall be, and the same hereby are, offered to the State of Texas, which, when agreed to by that State, in an act passed by the general assembly, shall be binding and obligatory upon the United States and upon the said State of Texas: Provided, The said agreement by the said general assembly shall be given on or before the first day of December, 1850: First. The State of Texas will agree that her boundary on the north shall commence at the point at which the meridian of. one hundred degrees west from Greenwich is intersected by the parallel of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes north latitude ; thence on the said parallel of thirty-second degree of north latitude to the Rio Bravo del Norte, and thence with the channel of said river to the Gulf of Mexico. Second. The State of Texas codes to the United States all her claim to territory exterior to the limits and boundaries which she agrees to establish by the first article of this agreement. Third. The United States in considera. tion of said establishment of boundaries, cession of claim to terri- tory, and relinquishment of claims, will pay to the State of Texas the sum of ten million dollars in a stock burg Are py !! interest and redeemable at the end of fourteen years, the mich t payable half yearly at the Treasury of the U'united States."
The same act (of September 9, 1850) established the boundary of the Territory of New Mexico, as follows: "Beginning at a point on the Colorado river where the boundary line with the Republic of Mexico crosses the same ; thence eastwardly with said boundary line to the Rio Grande; thence following the main channel of said river to the parallel of the thirty- second degree of north latitude ; thence cast with said degree to its intersection with the one hundred and third degree of longitude west from Green- wich ; thence north with said degree of longitude to the parallel of thirty-eight degrees of north latitude ; thence west with said parallel to the summit of the Sierra Madre: thence south with the crest of said mountains to the thirty seventh parallel of north latitude."
-
. This ship between the Huty seventh and thuis eighth parallels of latitude. and the one hundred and thuế mendian and the Mienia Madres became known talet as "The North."
·
436
THE PROVINCE AND THE STATES.
thence west with said parallel to its intersection with the boundary line of the State of California ; thence with said boundary line to the place of beginning." This act was suspended in its operation until the boundary between the United States and Texas had been estab- lished. It required a proclamation of the president to be put in force. The same act also gave the following boundary to the Territory of Utah: "That all that part of the territory of the United States included within the following limits, to-wit : Bounded on the west by the State of California ; on the north by the Territory of Oregon; on the east by the summit of the Rocky mountains, and on the south by the thirty-seventh parallel of north latitude, be, and the same is hereby, created into a temporary Government by the name of the Territory of Utah."
The Territory of Washington was formed March 2, 1853, with the following boundaries: "That from and after the passage of this act, all that portion of Oregon Territory bing and being south of the forty-ninth degree of north latitude and north of the mid- dle of the main channel of the Columbia river, from its month to where the forty-sixth degree of north latitude crosses said river near Fort Wallawalla: thence with said forty-sixth degree of latitude to the summit of the Rocky mountains, be organized into and constituted a temporary Government by the name of the Ter- ritory of Washington." The government reserved the right to manage the Indians and their lands. It was made to embrace the northern part of the present State of Idaho.
By the act of June 5. 1858, congress made provision for the survey of so much of the boundary line "Between Texas and the United States," as the expression was the content, as lig ator west of the one hundredth meridian west from Greenwich. This line extended north on that meridian from Red river to the parallel of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes north latitude ; thence west along that parallel, in accordance with the special agreement with Texas, to the one hundred and third meridian west from Greenwich ; thence south on that meridian to the thirty-second parallel of north latitude; and thence west on that parallel to the Rio Grande. On February S. 1865, the general assembly of Texas created Greer county with the following boundaries: "Beginning at the confluence of Red river and Prairie Dog river, thence running up Red river passing the mouth of South Bank and following Main or North Red river to its intersection with the twenty-third degree of west longitude from Washington the same as one hundred degree west from Greenwich ) : thence der south across Salt Fork and to l'mairie Dog river, and thence fol- lowing that river to the place of beginning." In this manner
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.