Greer Co. OK -     History of Greer County

Submitted by:  Jodean Martin jodeanmartin@cox.net
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
USGENWEB ARCHIVES NOTICE:  These electronic pages may NOT be reproduced 
in any format for profit or presentation by any other organization or
persons.  Persons or organizations desiring to use this material, must
obtain the written consent of the contributor, or the legal representative
of the submitter, and contact the listed USGenWeb archivist with proof of
this consent.

The submitter has given permission to the USGenWeb Archives to store the
file permanently for free access.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
History of Greer County


In the Supreme Court of the United States, October Term, 1890
The United States of America
vs
The State of Texas
No. 5, Original

__________________________________________
Original Bill in Equity
W.H. H. Miller, attorney general; Edgar Allen, solicitor.
To the honorable the chief justice and associate justices of the Supreme 
Court of the United States, in chancery sitting:

In pursuance of section 25 of an act of Congress approved the 2d day of 
May, 1890, entitled "An act to provide a temporary government for the 
Territory of Oklahoma, to enlarge the jurisdiction of the United States 
court in the Indian Territory, and for other purposes," the United 
States of Texas.

Whereupon, humbly complaining, your oratrix, The United States, 
respectfully showeth: That on the 22d day of February, in the year 1819, 
a treaty was concluded and was subsequently(to wit, on the 22d day of 
February. 1821.) ratified and proclaimed between the United States of 
America and Spain, which said treaty was intended, as shown by its 
terms, to "designate with precision the limits of the respective 
bordering territories in North America" between the two said contracting 
powers; that by the third article of said treaty it was provided and 
agreed that------------

The boundary line between the two countries, west of the Mississippi, 
shall begin on the Gulf of Mexico at the mouth of the River Savine, in 
the sea, continueing north along the western bank of that river to the 
thirty-second degree of latitude; thence by a line due north to the 
degree of latitude where it strikes the Rio Roxo of Natchitoches or Red 
River; then following the course of the Rio Roxo, westward, to the 
degree of longitude 100 west from London and 23 from Washington; then, 
crossing the said Red River, and running thence by a line due north to 
the River Arkansas; thence, following the course of the southern bank of 
the Arkansas to its source, in latitude 42 north; and thence, by that 
parallel of latitude, to the South sea. The whole being as laid down in 
Melish's map of the United States, published at Philadelphia, improved 
to the 1st of January, 1818.

But if the source of the Arkansas river shall be found to fall north of 
south of latitude 42; then the line shall run from the said source due 
south or north, as the case may be, till it meets the said parallel 42, 
and thence along the said parallel to the South sea. All the islands in 
the Sabine and the said Red and Arkansas rivers, throughout the course 
thus described, to belong to the United States America, but the use of 
the waters and the navigation of the Sabine to the sea, and of the said 
Roxo and Arkansas, through out the extent of the said boundary on their 
respective banks, shall be common to the respective inhabitants of both 
nations.

The two high contracting parties agreeing to cede and renounce all their 
rights, claims, and pretensions to the territories described by the said 
line. That is to say, the United States hereby cede to his Catholic 
majesty and renounce forever all their rights, claims, and pretensions 
to the territories lying west and south of the above described line, and 
in like manner his Catholic majesty cedes to the United States all all 
his rights, claims, and pretensions to any territory east and north of 
the said line, and for himself, his heirs, and successors renounces all 
claim to the said territory forever.





And your oratrix states that at the date of the conclusion of the treaty 
aforesaid Mexico constituted a part of the Spanish monarchy, but that 
Mexico subsequently, in the year 1824, became and was established as a 
separate and independent power and government, and the boundary line 
defined and designated in the treaty of 1819, aforesaid, thereby became 
in part the boundary line between the UInited States and Mexico, all the 
territory of the State of Texas being than a part of the Mexican territory.

And your oratrix further states that on the 12th day of January, 1828, a 
treaty was concluded and was subsequently, to wit, on the 5th day of 
April, 1832, ratified and proclaimed between the United States of 
America and the United Mexican states, the object and purpose of which 
said last-mentioned treaty was therein declared to be------------------
'
"With the intention to confirm the validity of the aforesaid treaty of 
limits (treaty of 1819) regarding it as still in force, and in force, 
and binding between the United States Of America and the United Mexican 
States."

And your oratrix further states that subsequently to the ratification 
and proclamation of the said treaties of 1819 and 1828, respectiavely, 
to wit: In the year 1837, Texas became and was recognized as an 
independent republic, and no longer under the power and jurisdiction of 
the government of Mexico;and that during the existence of the said 
Republic of Texas, to wit on the 25th day of April, 1838, a treaty was 
concluded and was subsequently, to wit, on October 12 and 13, 1828, 
ratified and proclaimed between the United States of American and the 
republic of Texas, by which said treaty it was declared that "the treaty 
of limits made and concluded on the twelfth day of January, in the year 
of our Lord, one thousand eight hundred and twenty-eight, between the 
United States of America on the one part and the United Mexican States 
on the other, is binding upon the Republic of Texas, the same having 
been entered into at a time when Texas formed part of the Unlimited 
Mexican States;" which said treaty, after reciting in its preamble that 
" it is deemed proper and expedient, in order to prevent future disputes 
and collisions between the United States and Texas in regard to the 
boundaries between the two countries as designated by the said treaty, 
that a portion of the same should be run and marked without unneccessary 
delay," contained the following articles, to wit.


Article I


Each of the contracting parties shall appoint a commissioner and 
surveyor, who shall meet, before the termination of twelve months from 
the exchange of the ratification of this convention, at New Orleadns, 
and proceed to run and mark that portion of the said boundary which 
extends from the mouth of the Sabine, where that river enters the Gulf 
of Mexico, to the Red river. They shall make out plans and keep journals 
of their proceedings, and the result agreed upon by them shall be 
considered as part of this convention, and shall have the same force as 
if it were inserted therein.

Articles II

And it is agreed that until this line is marked out, as is provided for 
in the foregoing article, each of the contracting parties shall continue 
to exercise jurisdiction in all territory over which its



The said act contained among others the following provisions;
SECTION I.***That the governor of this State be, and is hereby, 
authorized and empowered to appoint a suitable person or persons who, in 
conjunction with such person or persons as may be appointed by or on 
behalf of the United States for the same purpose, shall run and mark the 
boundary lines between the territories of the United States and the 
State of Texas, as follows: beginning at a point where a line drawn 
north from the intersection for the thirty-second degree of north 
latitude with the western bank of Sabine river crosses the Red river and 
thence following the
course of said river westwardly to the degree of longitude 100 west from 
London and 23 degrees west from Washington, as said line was laid down 
in Melish's map of the United States, published at Philadelphis, 
improved to the 1st of January, 1818, and designated in the treaty 
between the United States and Spain, made February 22, 1819.

SEC. 2 Said joint commission will report their survey, made in 
accordance with the foregoing section of this act, together with all 
necessary notes, maps, and other papers, in order that in fixing that 
part of the boundarybetween the territories of the United States and the 
State of Texasthe question may be definitely settled as to the true 
location of the one-hundredth degree of longitude west from London, and 
whether the North fork of Red river, or the Prairie Dog fork of said 
river, is the true Red river designated in the treaty between the United 
States and Spain, made February 22, 1819; and in locating said line said 
commissioners shall be guided by actual surveys and measurements, 
together with such well-established marks, natural and artificial, as 
may be found, and such well authenticated maps as may throw light on the 
subject.

SEC. 3. Such commissioner, or commissioners, on the part of Texas, shall 
attempt to have said survey herein provided for by the joint commission 
made and performed between the 1st day of July and the 1st day of 
October, in the year in which such survey is made, when the ordinary 
stage of water in each fork of said Red river may be observed; and when 
the main or principal Red river is ascertained as agreed upon in said 
treaty of 1819, and the point is fully designated where the one 
hundredth degree of longitude west from London, and twenty-third degree 
of longitude west from Washington, crosses said Red river, the same 
shall be plainly marked and defined as a corner in said boundary, and 
said commission shall establish such other permanent monuments as may be 
necessary to mark their work.

And following the passage of the act last aforesaid, your oratrix 
further showeth that in 1885, an act was passed by the Congress of the 
United States, approved January 31, 1885, entitled:


north to the degree of latitude where it strikes the Rio Roxo of 
Natchitoches or Red River; thence follwing the course of the Rio Roxo 
westward to the one hundredth degree of longitude west from London, and 
the twenty-third from Washington; thence crossing the said Red river, 
and running thence by a line due north to the River Arkansas; thence 
following the course of the southern bank of the Arkansas to its source 
in latitude 42 degrees north; and thence by that parallel of latitude to 
the South sea, the whole being as laid down in Melish's map of the 
United States, published at Philadelphia, improved to the 1st of 
January, 1818; and

Whereas the point of crossing has never been ascertained and fixed by 
any authority competent to bind the United States and Texas; and

Whereas it is desirable that a settlement of this controversy should be 
had, to the end that the question of boundary now in dispute because of 
a difference of opiunion as to said crossing, may also be settled: 
Therefore,

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That the President of the 
United States be, and is hereby, authorized to detail one or more 
officers of the army, who in conjunction with such person or persons as 
may be appointed by the State of Texas, shall ascertain and mark the 
point where the one hundredth meridian of longitude crosses Red river, 
in accordance with the terms of a treaty aforesaid, and the person or 
persons appointed by virtue of this act shall make report of his or 
their action in the premises to the Secretary of the Interior, who shall 
transmit the same to Congress at the next session thereof after
such report may be made, for action by Congress.

And your oratrix further states that commissioners were by virtue of the 
act of Contress and the act of the legislature of Texas aforesaid 
appointed by the respective governments for the purposes as set forth in 
said acts; that the joint commission assembled for the first time in 
Galveston, Texas, on February 23, 1886, from which time until the 16 day 
of August, 1886, said commission was engaged in the formulation of plans 
and issues, the oral examination of witnesses, the examination of maps 
and documentary evidence pertinent to the mattewr of inquiry, the 
preparation, presentation, and discussion of propositions and issues of 
fact, and voting thereon, when, upon the date last aforesaid, the said 
joint commission being unable to agree and reach a determination as to 
whether the stream now known as the North fork of Red river or that now 
called the South fork or Main Red river was the river referred to in the 
treaty of 1819 aforesaid, the said joint commission dissolved and 
adjourned sine die, with the agreement that each commission made its 
report to the proper authorities and await instructions.

And your oratrix further states that the result and determination on the 
part of the commissioners for the United States on the joint commission 
last aforesaid was, "That the Prairie Dog Town fork is the true 
boundary, and that the monument should be placed at the intersection of 
the one hundredth meridian with this stream." which was reported to the 
Secretary of the Interior as provided by the act of Congress aforesaid, 
while the result and determination on the part of the commissioners for 
the State of Texas was----

That the North fork of Red river, as now named and delineated on the 
maps, is the Rio Rojo or Red river delineated on Melish's maps, 
described in the treaty of February 22, 1819, and is the

And your oratrix further states that under and by virtue of the terms of 
the treaty of 1819 between the United States and Spain, she became 
entitled to possession of and jurisdiction over all that parcel or tract 
of land which lies between what has been herein designated as the 
Prairie Dog
Town fork or Main Red river, and the North fork of Red river, which said 
parcel of land,k according to the survey made by Jones & Brown, 
aforesaid, contains 1,5121,576, 170 acres, and is more accurately 
described as the extreme portion of the Indian Territory lying west of 
the North fork of Red river, and east of the one hundredth meridian of 
west longitude from Greenwich; that she has never voluntarily abandoned 
or relinquished such claim of title and jurisdiction, but has 
continuously asserted the same at all times since the ratification of 
said treaty of 1819 and to the present time, and does still assert the 
same; that said tract of land was never, subject to the jurisdiction or 
claim of Spain subsequent to the treaty of 1819, aforesaid, nor was it 
subject by any claim or jurisdiction on the part of Mexico after her 
independence from Spain was secured and asserted.

Your oratrix further states that after the organization of said 
territory into a county by the name of Greer county, as aforesaid, the 
said county was designated as such upon certain maps of the State of 
Texas, but was never so recognized by or upon any map published by or 
under any authority of the United States; that on the 24th day of 
February, in the year 1879, the Congress of the United States passed an 
act creating and establishing the northern judicial district of Texas; 
that in arranging said district, access was had to one of said maps of 
Texas upon which Greer county was designated as aforesaid, and that by 
inadvertence the said territory was included in said judicial district 
as a part thereof; but your oratrix avers(?) that said act was in no way 
intended and cannot be lawfully construed as a cession of said disputed 
territory to the State of Texas, or an abandonment of the claim of the 
United States thereto, nor was it so regarded by the State of Texas, as 
already shown in this bill, in the allegation that without any further 
action on the part of the United States, the said State of Texas did, by 
the act of May 2, 2882 provide for the appointment of a commission for 
the purpose of ascertaining, among other things, "Whether the North fork 
of Red river or the Prairie Dog fork of said river is the true Red river 
designated in the treaty between the United States and Spain,, made 
February 22, 1819.

And your oratrix further states that the said State of Texas has, 
without any right or title thereto, claimed, taken possession of, and 
endeavored to extend its laws and jurisdiction over the said parcel or 
tract of land hereinbefore described, and does still claim, hold 
possession of, and exercise certain jurisdiction over the same, and has 
excluded the United States from possession of and jurisdiction over the 
same, in violation of the treaty rights of your oratrix as aforesaid; 
all of which your oratrix charges is a manifest invasion of her 
sovereign rights and tends to the disturbance of that amity and peace 
which ought to exist between the authorities of the United States and 
the State of Texas.

And your oratrix further states that, during the year 1887, the said 
State of Texas gave public notice of a purpose to survey and place upon 
the market for sale and to otherwise dispose of the territory embraced 
within the limits of the disputed territory above described; and was 
proceeding to eject from certain portions there of a large number of 
bona fide settlers who had taken up homesteads thereon; whereupon, on 
the 30th day of December, 1887, to the end that such wrongful and 
unlawful acts might be prevented, a certain proclamation was issued by 
the President of the United States, a copy of which said proclamation is 
herewith filed, marked Exhibit A, and prayed toa be taken and considered 
as a part of this bill.

In consideration whereof, and forasmuch as your oratrix can only have 
adequate relief in the premises in a court of equity, where matters of 
this nature are properly cognizable and relievable, and in this court by 
original bill, to the end and for the purpose of determining and 
settling the true boundary line between the United States and the State 
of Texas, and to determine and put at rest questions which now exist as 
to whether the Prairie Dog Town fork or the North fork of Red river, as 
aforesaid, constitutes the true boundary line of the treaty of 1819, 
aforesaid, and whether the tract or parcel of land lying and being 
between two said streams, and called by the authorities of the State of 
Texas "Greer county," is within the boundaryand jurisdiction of the 
United States, or of the State of Texas, your oratrix prays that she be 
permitted to file this, her bill of complaint, against the said State of 
Texas, and that the said State of Texas be made a defendant hereto, and 
that a proper subpoena in chancery issue herein against the said State 
of Texas, commanding her, by a day named therein, to appear and make a 
full and complete answer under the corporate seal of said State, of all 
and singular the matters aforesaid, as fully and particularly as if the 
same were here repeated in the form of distinct interrogatories, and 
more particularly that the said State of Texas shall set forth and 
define specifically the claim that she hath or may make to the said 
territory in dispute; and that upon final hearing your honors may enter 
a decree establishing the rights, claims and jurisdiction of your 
oratrix as claimed in her said bill; that your honors will grant unto 
your oratrix such other, further, and general relief in the premisses as 
the nature and circumstances of the case may require, and to equity 
shall seem meet and proper that all proper process may issue, and hour 
oratrix will ever pray, etc.



Complainant,
By EDGAR ALLAN
Solicitor for Complainant

THE UNITED STATES
W.H.H. MILLER
Attorney General C
Attorney General Counsel
__________________________________________________________________________________
EXHIBIT A
(Filed with bill)

By the President of the United States of America
A Proclamation
Wheras the title to all that territory lying between the north and south 
forks of Red river and the hundredth degree of longitude, and 
jurisdiction over the same are vested in the United States, it being a 
part of the Indian Territory, as shown by surveys and investigation made 
on behalf of the United States, which territory the State of Texas also 
claims title to and jurisdiction over; and

Whereas said conflicting claim grows out of a controversy existing 
between the United States and the State of Texas as to the point where 
the hundredth degree of longitude crosses the Red river
as described in the treaty of February 22, 1819, between the United 
States and Spain, fixing the boundary line between the two countries, and
Whereas the commissioners, appointed on the part of the United States 
under the act of January 31, 1885, authorizing the appointment of a 
commission by the President to run and mark the boundary lines between a 
portion of the Indian Territory and the State of Texas in connection 
with a similar commission to be appointed by the State of Texas, have by 
their report determined that the South fork is the true Red river 
designated in the treaty, the commissioner appointed on the part of said 
State refusing to concur in said report how, therefore, I, Grover 
Cleveland, President of the Uniterd States, do hereby admonish and warn 
all persons, whether claiming to act as officers of the county of Greer, 
in the State of Texas, or otherwise, against selling or disposing of, or 
attempting to sell or dispose of any of said lands, or from exercising 
or attempting to exercise any authority over said lands.

And I also warn and admonish all persons against purchasing any part of 
said territory from any person or persons whomsoever.
In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand.---- caused the seal of 
the United States to be affixed.

Done at the city of Washington this thirtieth day of December, in the 
year of our Lord one thousand and eight hundred eighty seven, and of the 
Independence of the United States the one hundred and twelfth.
GROVER CLEVELAND
(seal)

T. F. BAYARD
Secretary of State

(Endorsed): Supreme court U.S. 1894, October term. No. 4. Original. The 
United States, complainant, vs. The State of Texas. Bill of complaint. 
Filed October 17, 1890.

Original Answer
In the Supreme Court of the United States, October Term, 1890
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Complainant






In the Supreme Court of the United States, October Term, 1890

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Complainant,
against No.5 Original Docket
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Defendant
Answer of the State of Texas


Agustus H. Garland, John Hancock, Garland Clark, H.J. May, solictors for 
defendant.
This defendant saving and reserving unto herself the benefit of all 
exceptions to the errors and imperfections in said bill contained, for 
answer thereto, or to so much thereof as she is advised it is necessary 
or material for her to answer, does aver and say as follows:

I.
This defendant, by protestation not confessing or acknowledging all of 
the matters and things in the said bill of complaint contained to be 
true, in manner and form as the same are therein set forth and alleged, 
doth demur to said bill. And for causes of demurrer defendant showeth:

1. That it appears by the complainant's own showing by the said bill 
that she is not entitled to the relief prayed by the bill against this 
defendant, in that complainant seeks by her said bill to obtain from 
this court a decree judicially settling and determining the true 
boundary line between the United States of America and the State of 
Texas, which question is political in its nature and character and not 
susceptible of judicial determination by this court in the exercise of 
its jurisdiction as conferred by the Constitution and laws of the United 
States.


2. That it appears by the terms of complainant's bill that this is a 
suit by the United States of American against the State of Texas, and it 
is not competent under the Constitution and laws of the United States of 
America, for said United States of America to sue one of its component 
States in her own courts. And especially is it true that said United 
States is not empowered under her Constitution and laws to sue the State 
of Texas, in a court of the United States, for the recovery of a right 
mutually claimed by the United States of America and the State of Texas, 
to wit, the ownership of certain designated territory, and the 
establishment of the boundary line between the respective governments.

3. That it appears by the terms of complainant's bill filed in this 
cause that the complainant claims as the boundary line between the 
United States of America and the State of Texas, the following 
designated calls, to wit; "Begin on the Gulf of Mexico, at the mouth of 
the river Sabine, in the sea, continuing north along the western bank of 
that river to the thirty-second degree of latitude; thence by a line due 
north to the degree of latitude where it strikes the Rio Roxo of 
Nachitoches or Red river; then following the course of the Rio Roxo 
westward to the degree of longitude 100 west from London and 23 from 
Washington; then crossing the said Red river, and running thence by a 
line due north to the river Arkansas, thence following the course of the 
southern bank of the Arkansas to its source in latitude 42 north and 
thence by that parallel of latitude to the South sea. The whole being, 
as laid down in Melish's map of the United States, published at 
Philadelphia, improved to the 1st of January, 1818." Whereby said 
Melish's map, so designated, became and is an essential part of said 
descriptive calls, and without which neither this court nor defendant 
are informed definitely as to the limits of complainant's claim, nor the 
exact extent of territory claimed by complainant to her said bill. Yet 
to attach the original of said map or an authenticated copy thereof to 
said bill complainant has wholly failed, whereby and by reason of such 
failure, the court cannot be informed with certainty and definiteness 
what complainant claims, and said bill is uncertain, defective and 
insufficient.

Wherefore, this defendant submits to this court whether she ought to be 
required to further answer said bill demurred to.

II

And the said defendant, The State of Texas, not waiving her said 
demurrer, but saving and reserving to herself the benefit thereof, and 
of all other exceptions to the many errors and imperfections in said 
bill contained, for answer to so much thereof as she is advised it is 
necessary or material for her to answer, does aver and say as follows:

This defendant admits that on the 22d day of February, in the year 1819, 
a treaty was concluded between the United States of America and the King 
of Spain, which treaty was intended,




and geogaraphical condition of the territory under discussion between 
the representatives of the high contractiang paraties to said treaty, 
were well kinown and understood by at least one of said high contracting 
parties, to wit, the King of Spain, which information was imparted to 
the other contracting party abefore the conclusion of said treaty. That 
for a long period of time bghefore the making of said treaty, to wit, 
for more than an hundred years, Spain had conquered and occupied, and 
was claiming by right of conquest and discovery, the whole of the 
territory beyond the Sabine river on the east of the Pacific ocean on 
the west, extending northwardly from the Gulf of Mexico to the Missouri 
river and the river Columbia, and including the territory of Greer 
County, now the subject-matter of this controversy between complainant 
and defendant. That Spain, through her subjects, had established and 
mainatained, for at least a like period of time, extensive colonies and 
military establishments throughou the territory of Texas and adjacent 
territories, to wit, at San Antonio de Bexar, at Nacagdoches, at 
Notchitoches, now in the State of Louisana, at Santa Fe, now in the 
Territory of New Mexico, and at divers other points; and had provided, 
laid out and maintained travelled ways and roads between her several 
colonies and settlements aforesaid, the general routes and courses of 
which roads are known to this day; and had protected, fostered and 
encouraged commerce and trade betweena the settlements. That the name 
"Rio Roxo" was first given to Red river by the Sapniards who conquered 
Mexico and extended their conquests into the particular locality now in 
controversy, and north of and across said stream, and that they (the 
Spaniards) designated said stream as "Rio Roxo of Natchitoches," to 
distinguish it from another "Rio Roxo," of Red river, already so named 
and designated in a different locality. That in accordance with their 
usual custom the Spanish conqueror, upon taking possession of 
Natchitoches and the territory lying on or adjacent to "Rio Roxo,:" 
established and laid out a road or route between Santa Fe, in New 
Mexico, and Natchitoches, now in the State of Louisiana, for the uses of 
commerce between said places, which road or route traversed the country 
west and northwest of Natchitoches, along the south bank of said "Rio 
Roxo," to a point now in ____county, Texas, then crossed said stream to 
its north bank and thence along said north bank to the source of what 
complainant now styles the "North fork of Red river" and thence to Santa 
Fe. That this road was for many years frequently travelled by merchants, 
traders, trappers, exploreres and other persons trading or travelling 
between said points of Santa Fe and Natchitoches, and at the date of 
said treaty of 1819, "Rio Roxo of Natchitoches," from its mouth its 
source, was well known to the Spaniards, as well as to the Indians and 
trappers of that region of country, as the stream now called Red River, 
having its source near the source of Canadian river southeast of and 
near to Santa Fe, in the new Territory of New Mexico' thence running in 
an eastern of southeastern direction. receiving ;on its course at 
intervals the waters of the False Washita river, The Kecheaqueheno or 
"Prairie Dog Town river, Pease river, Little and Big Wichita rivers, and 
divers other streams and emptying it waters into the Mississippi river 
above New Orleans, in the State of Louisiana. at the date of said treaty 
of 1819, there was only one "Rio Roxo of Natichoes" known to geographers 
of to the people who inhabited the locatlity of the territory in 
controversy, and that was the river above described, nor was it over 
pretended, assumed or claimed that any tributary streams were know and 
designated by particular names, having no reference to Rio Roxo, or 
classes as part of said stream; and especially was this true as to the 
Kecheaquehono or Prairie Dog Town river, which was as well known to the 
Spaniards and Indian as Rio Roxo, and from earliest traditon down to the 
making of said treaty of 1819; and for nearly forty years thereafter, 
was always known and called "Kecheaquehono", an Indian term meaning 
"Prairie Dog Town river."
Defendant shows that no claim was ever preferred or asserted that the 
Kecheaquehono river was a fork or branch of Red river, until the year 
1852, when Captain R B Marcy, then an officer in the army of 
complainant, claimed to be its first white discoverer, and without law 
or lawful authority, changed its name from what it had always been 
called aforetime, and named it the South for or Main Red river; and in 
the like absence of law and lawful authority, the said Marcy gave the 
name of "North fork of Red river" to the Rio Roxo of the Spaniards and 
Indians, and the Rio Roxo of the treaty of 1819. And this defendant 
avers that this claim of ownership of the territory of Greer county had 
its origin and inception after the year 1852, and is and has ever been 
predictated upon an unlawful and unwarranted change of well established 
geographical names, made by geographical names. made by a subaltern 
officer of complainant nearly forty years after the treaty of 1819, and 
this the defendant will verify.

This defendant further shows to the court that the conditions and 
characteristics of said two streams, to wit, the Kecheaquehono and Red 
river, are so totally dissimilar as to manifest the impossibility of 
their being confounded as branches of the same river, or that the former 
could ever have been designated as Rio Roxo, which means Red river. This 
defendant shows that what complainant calls the North fork of Red river, 
but which is truth and in fact if Red river, and the "Rio Roxo"

acquiescence, or consent of this defendant, and cannot therefore affect 
this defendant either at law or in equity. That the line of said one 
hundredth meridian of longitude west from London, as laid down in said 
map of Melish, intersects the Rio Roxo, or Red river, a distance of many 
miles, east of what is claimed by complainant to be the true line of 
said meridian, and many miles east of the point where the Kecheaquebone 
empties its waters into the Rio Roxo of the treaty; and said meridian so 
laid down on Melish's map and extended north to the forty-second 
parallel of north latitude includes as territory properly belonging and 
conceded to Spain under the terms of the treaty, and belonging of right 
to Texas by virtue of the establishment of her independence, a large 
part of the lands now belonging to the Chickasaw and other tribes of 
Indias, under concessions by treaty, as well as a portion of the present 
States of Kansas and of Colorado and a part of the Territory of New 
Mexico. Defendant shows that long before and after the date of said 
treaty of 1819, the King of Spain claimed all this territory lying west 
of said 100th meridian of longitude and south of said 42d jparallel of 
latitude as laid down upon Melish's map; and in effectuation of such 
claim, exercised rejpeated acts of ownership and dominion over the same, 
without question; and after securing her independence and establishment 
as an independent nation, the United Mexican States likewise asserted 
their dominion and authority over said territory; and Texas, both as a 
separate republic and


"Joint resolution giving the consent of the existing government to the 
annexation of Texas to the United States," approved June 23d, 1845, did 
consent that the people and territory of the Republic of Texas might be 
erected into a new State to be called the State of Texas, upon the 
terms, guarantees and conditions proposed in the join5t resolution of 
the Congress of the United States; and thereafter, to wit; on the 4th 
day of July, 1845, and in accordance with the terms of said joint 
resolution last mentioned, the people of the Republic of Texas, in 
convention assembled in their sovereign, capacity, by ordinance, did 
ordain and declare that they assented to and accepted the proposals, 
conditions, and guarantees contained in the first and second sections of 
the joint resolution of Congress of the United States aforesaid. And 
therupon Texas was admitted as a component State of the United States 
upon the terms, conditions, and guarantees of said original joint 
resolution of March 1st, 1845.

This defendant further shows that thereafter, to wit, on the 11th day of 
February, 1850, this defendant, as a declaration of her continuous right 
of ownership and of sovereignty over the whold of that portion of her 
territory lying south of forty-two degrees of north latitude and west of 
the hundredth meridian of longitude west from London, as laid down upon 
Melish's map aforesiad did, through its legislative and executive 
departments, adopt and promulgate the following public joint resolution, 
to wit: "Resolved by the legislature of the State of Texas, That all 
that territory which lies east of the Rio Grands, and a line running 
north from the source of the Rio Grande to the forty-second degree of 
north latitude, and south of the forty second degree of north latitude, 
and west and south of the line designated in the treaty between the 
United States and the late Republic of Texas (meaning there by the 
treaty of 1838, referred to in complainant's bill) of right belongs to 
the State of Texas, is included within her rightful civil and political 
jurisdiction, and the State of Texas will maintain the integrity of her 
territory. Approved Febuary 11, 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, and shall run from said point due west to 
the meridian of one hundred and three degrees west from Greenwhich; 
thence her boundary shall run due south to the thirty-second degree of 
north latitude; thence on the said parallel of thirty-two degrees 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 cedes to the United Statesw 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 State of Texas relinquishes all claim upon the United States 
for liability of the debts of Texas, and for compensation or indemnity 
for the surrender to the United States of her ships, ports, arsenals, 
custom-house revenues, arms and munitions of war, and public buildings 
with their sites, which became the property of the United States at the 
time of the annexation.

"Fourth. The United States in consideration of said establishment of 
boundaries, cession of claim to territory, and relinquishment of claims, 
will pay to the State of Texas the sum of ten million


between the North fork of Red river and Main Red river, as bounded on 
the west bay the onehundredth meridian aforesaid.
Book page 31
And now your oratrix states that a period of forty years elapsed after 
the making of said treaty of 1819, without any other action being had or 
taken looking to an agreement as to the now-disputed boundary lines than 
as above states; without any official survey of any part of said 
boundary lines being made or any monument or other marks planted to 
designate any point or points set forth in either of said several 
treaties, when, from the year 1857 to 1859, under a contract with Jones 
& Brown and the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, for the United States, 
an astronomical survey was made of the one hundredth meridian, west from 
Greenwich, being the boundary line between the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
country of Texas, the initial point of which said boundary line was 
determined to be at the intersection of said one hundredth meridian with 
what was designated at that time upon the maps of the General Land 
Office of the United States as the Red river, and a monument was 
thereupon established 30 chains due north from the north bank of said 
river, the Red river her referred to being what is now known as the Main 
Red river, as contradistinguished from what is known and delineated upon 
modern map as the North fork of Red river.
page 32
And your oratrix further states that at the date of said treaty of a1819 
so made between the United States and Spain, as aforesaid and when 
Melish's map, as improaved to January 1, 1818 was made the map of said 
treaty, the main stream of the Red river ran as to now claimed by your 
oratrix; that what is called the North fork of Red river also ran as now 
claimed by your oratrix; that what is herein claimed as the Main Red 
river, and river of the treaty, was then, as now; longer and wider and 
drained a larger area of country, and in all respects corresponded more 
nearly to the Red river, as laid down on the treaty map, than did the 
North fork of Red river, and, in fact, yuour oratrix avers that the map 
of the treaty aforesaid shows no stream beyond the coniluence of the 
forks of Red river herein referred to running westward which in any way 
answers to the condition, direction and surroundings of the North fork 
of Red river.

And your oratrix further avers that at the date of said treaty she had 
no other guide, knowledge, or information than such as was furnished by 
Melish's map, aforesaid, of the topogaraphy of the country in the 
vicinity of that part of Red Rivera which skirts the territory now in 
dispute between your oratrix and the State of Texas; that Melish's map 
was made by said Melish without the accurate knowledge on his part, as 
to the westward course of Red river beyond the forks before referred to; 
that he, in fact, had no knowledge of the existence of said forks, and 
in running the line of said river from the point where subsequent 
exploration and actual survey have demonstrated their existence, he ran 
only an imaginary line in the direction, which he supposed would lead to 
what should thereafter be ascertained as the actual source and direction 
of the continuous main stream of the Red river.

And your oratrix further states that at the date of said treaty of 1819 
there was no notice to her on the part of the King of Spain of any 
physiucal and geographical condition of the territory under discussion 
in conflict with or explanatory of the lines and conditions as laid down 
in Melish's Map aforesaid, and she insits and contends that if the King 
of Spain, as the other contraction party with herself to said treaty, 
was in possession of such knowledge or information it was his bounden 
and lawful duty to have imparted such knowledge to your oratrix, and 
that in determining the obligations of the high contracting parties in 
said treaty such knowledge and failure to give notice thereof to your 
oratrix entitles her to a solution and determination in her favor of all 
controverted questions or boundary growing out of such failure to give 
notice to your orafix as aforesaid.


Page 32 book number left side, in the microfilm.

her claims upon the United States, and to establish a territorial 
government for New Mexico.' "
(After reciting the act of Congress above set out)

Be it enacted by the legtislature of the State of Texas, That the State 
of Texas hereby agrees to and accepts said propostions; and it is hereby 
declared that the said State shall be bound by the terms thereof, 
according to their true import and meaning.

"2d. That the governor of this State be and he is hereby requested to 
cause a copy of this act, authjenticated under the seal of the State, to 
be furnished to the President of the United States by mail as early as 
practicable; and also a copy thereof, certified in like manner, to be 
transmitted to each of the Senators and Representatives of Texas in 
Congress; and that this act take effect from and after its passage.

"Approved, November 25, 1850."

Whereby said propositions and their acceptance became and was a contract 
and engagement between complainant and defendant, of binding legal force 
upon both of said governments, and an estoppel upon each government 
forbidding either to claim or demand aught of the other in contravention 
of the terms of said contract; which estoppel this defendant here now 
expressly pleads in bar of the relief prayed for by complainant, and in 
bar of any recovery in the suit by complainant. For this defendant avers 
and shows to the court that said contract has been in all things 
accepted and performed by complainant and defendant, by the payment by 
complainant of the money, consideration therein stipulated, and the 
abondonment by defendant of all claim of right or ownership of the 
territory so ceded to complainant by the State of Texas. Defendant is 
advised by her counsel and, so believing, states that the legal effect 
of the terms of said acts of purchase and sale of certain designated 
territory hitherto claimed by the State of Texas, under the terms of the 
treaty of 1819, was the abandonment by the United States of America of 
all claim of right, title or interest in and to anyh or further 
territory then claimed by Texas, under said treaty, situated in the 
locality of the territory in controversy, and not embraced within the 
terms of said legislative agreement; that the obvious purpose and intent 
of said agreement was, on the part of both governments, to peaceably and 
patriotically settle and adjust aforever between themselves, and under 
the terms and spirit of annexation, all disputed questions of boundaries 
between complainant and defendant arising,







And your oratrix further states that by the terms of said contract and 
engagement the said State of Texas accepted the true meridian line of 
100 degrees west from Greenwich as the point of intersection with the 
parrallel of 36 degrees 30 minutes north latitude, and relinquished and 
ceded toa the United States all her claim to territory exterior to the 
limits and boundaries aforesaid, but avewrs that no reference was made 
in said contract or agreement, nor was there by intendment between the 
parties there to any settlement of the question in dispute as the 
ownership of the terratory


And your oratrix further states that in the year, 1852, one Captain R. 
B. Marcy, an officer in the Army of the United States, with other 
officers of said army as his assistants, by the authority of the United 
States, made an exploration of the course and sources of the Red river, 
and on the conclusion thereof published the result of said explorations, 
showing among other things, that the stream wich your oratrix contends 
and claims is the river of the treaty which your oratrix contends
and claims is the river of the treaty with Spain as aforesaid was and is 
the main stream of Red river, of which fact as well as of the 
conclusions and determinations reached by Jones and Brown, the surveyors 
aforesaid, the State of Texas had notice; and that shortly after said 
last-mentioned act on the part of the United States is making said 
survey, to wit, in the year 1859, joint commissioners, on the part of 
the United States on the one part and of the State of Texas on the other 
part, commenced the work of running the boundary lines between the 
territories of the United States and the State of Texas, beginning (in 
accordance with the act of Contress approved June 5, 1858).

At the point where the one hundredth degree of longitude west from 
Greenwich crosses Red river, and running thence north to the point where 
said one hundredth degree of longitude intersect;s the parallel of 
thirty-six degrees and thirty minutes north latitude, to the point where 
it intersects the one hundred and third degree of longitude west from 
Greenwich, and thence south with the said one hundred and third degree 
of longitude to the thirty-second parallel of north latitude, and thence 
west with the said thirty second degree of north latitude to the Rio Grande.

The joint commission here referred to commenced the work assumed by 
them, but owing to personal differences which sprung up between them 
they did not long continue in co-operation in the work, but in the year 
1860, the commissioner on the part of the United States comkpleted the 
running of said boundary lines alone and without the aid and 
co-operation of the commissioner on the part of the State of Texas, and 
made report thereof to the General Land Office of the United States in 
the year 1861.

And your oratrix further states that the result and determination of the 
said surveys made by Jones and Brown aforesaid, and the commissioner on 
the part of the United States, under the act of Congress approved June 
5, 1858, aforesaid, was to the effect that the true dividing and 
boundary line between the Indsian Territories of the United Sates and 
the State of Texas, in accordance with the terms of the said treaty of 
limits between the United States and Spain in 1819, and the subsequent 
confirmataory treaty between the United States and the United Mexican 
States, began where the one hundredth meridian touched the Main Red 
river aforesaid, running thence along the line of course and what is now 
known as the South fork of the Red river, and is claimed by the United 
States to be the Main Red river, and is claimed by the United States to 
be the Main Red river or river of the treaty of 1819 aforesaid, and that 
all the territory lying between the said South fork or Main Red river 
and said North fork of Red river belongs and is subject to 
thejurisdiction and control of the United States, and does not belong 
and is not subject to the jurisdiction and control of the State Of 
Texas, but your oratrix admits that no part of said boundary survey has 
ever been officially agreed upon or accepted by the two Governments, as 
contemplated in the act of Congress authorizing the said survey.

And your oratrix further states that while the question of ownership 
ande jurisdiction over

page 33
page 34
said parcel of territory above described was and had been for years a 
matter of dispute between the United States and the State of Texas, the 
said State of Texas assumed to exercise certain jurisdiction and control 
over said parcel of dispujted territory; and after the futile effortsd 
to arrive at an agreement as to said boundary lines through the medium 
of a joint commission as aforesaid, and
before the commissioners engaged in the survey had completed their 
labors or made report thereon, the State of Texas dod. bu ots 
;egos;atire. [ass am act dec;aromg----------------------

That all the territory contained in the following limits, to wit, 
Beginning at the confluence of Red river and Prairie Dog river thence 
running up Red river, passing the mouth of South fork and following Main 
or North Red river to its intersection due north across Salt fork and 
Prairie Dog river, and thence following that river to the place of 
beginning, be and the same as hereby created into a county to be known 
by the name and style of the county of Greer.

Which said act was approved on the 8th day of February 1860 and has also 
by other acts of the officers of said State of Texas acting by virtue of 
the acts of the legislature aforesaid, assumed and exercised control and 
jurisdiction over said tract of land or territory aforesaid.

And your oratrix further showeth that notwithstanding the assertions of 
authority over and the exercise of jurisdiction by, the State of Texas, 
as aforesaid, over the parcel of land, aforesaid, the conflict of claims 
between the United States and the State of Texas continued through all 
the period from the date of the first-known act of authority over said 
parcel of land by the State of Texas until the year 1882, without any 
other or further action being had or taken by and between the United 
States and the State of Texas to ascertain and determine the question of 
boundary aforesaid, when the legislature of the State of Texas passed an 
act which was approved on the 2nd day of May 1882, entitled----------------

An act to provide for running and marking the boundary line between the 
State of Texas and the territory of the United States from the northeast 
corner of said State to the degree of longitude 100 west from London and 
23 degrees west from Washington, as said line is described in the treaty 
between the United States and Spain, of February 22, 1819, and for the 
payment of the expenses of such survey.

The said act contained among others the following provision:
Section 1,*****That the governor of this State be, and is hereby, 
authorized and empowered to appoint a suitable person or persons, who , 
in conjunction with such person or persons as may be appointed by or on 
behalf of the U nited States for the same purpose, shall run and mark 
the boundary lines between the territories of the United States and the 
State of Texas, as follows: Beginning at a point where a line drawn 
north from the intersection of the thirty-second degree of north 
latitude with the western bank of the Savine river crosses the Red 
river, and thence follwing the course of said river westwardly to the 
degree of longitude 100 west London and 23 degrees west from Washington, 
as said line was laid down in Melish's map of the United States, 
published at Philadelphia, improve to the 1st of January, 1818, and 
designated in the treaty between the United States and Spain, made 
Frebruary 22, 1819.

Section 2. Said joint commission will report their survey, made in 
accordance with the foregoing section of this act, together with all 
necessary notes, maps and other papers in order that in fixing that part 
of the boundary between the territories of the United States and the 
State of Texas the question may be definitely settled as to the true 
location of the one hundredth degree of longitude west from London and 
whether the North fork of Red River , or the Prairie Dog fork of said 
river, is the true Red river designated in the treaty between the United 
States and Spain; made





page35
February 22, 1819; and locating said line said commissioners shall be 
guided by actual surveys and measurement together with such well 
established marks, natural and artificial, as may be found, and such 
well authenticated maps as may throw light on the subject.

Section 3. Such commissioner or commissioners, on the part of Texas, 
shall attempt to have said survey herein provided for by the joint 
commission made and performed between the 1st day of July and the 1st 
day of October, in the year in which such survey is made, when the 
ordinary stage of water in each fork of said Red river may be observed; 
and when the main or principal Red river is ascertained, as agreed upon 
in said treaty of 1819, and the point is fully designated where the one 
hundredth degree of longitude west from London, and twenty-third degree 
of longitude west from Washington, crosses said Red river, the same 
shall be plainly marked and defined as a corner in said boundary, and 
said commission shall establish such other permanent monuments as may be 
necessary to mark their work.

And following the passage of the act last aforesaid, your oratrix 
farther showth that in 1885 an act was passed by the Congress of the 
United States, approved January 31, 1885 entitled:

An act to authorize the appointment of a commission by the President of 
the United States to run and mark the boundary lines between a portion 
of the Indian Territory and the State of Texas, in connection with a 
similar commission to he appointed by the State of Texas.


United States and the State of Texas; the said State of Texas assumed 
"to exercise certain jurisdiction and control over said parcel of 
disputed territory; and after the futile efforts to arrive at an 
agreement as to said boundary lines through the medium of a joint 
commission as aforesaid,
page 2
page 3
page 3

jurisdiction had hitherto been exercised, and that the remaining portion 
of the said boundary line shall be run and marked at such time hereafter 
as may suit the convenience of both the the contracting parties until 
which time time each of the said parties shall exercise without a the 
interferencxe of the other within the territory of which the boundary 
shall not have been so marked and run, jurisdiction to the same extent 
to which it has been heretofore usually exercised.

But your oratrix states that no further action was ever had or taken to 
mark the said boundary lines under the said treaty of limits between the 
United States and the Republic of Texas, but that said treaty was never 
executed, and said boundary lines was still undecided, when, under and 
by virtue of a joint resolution of the Congress of the United States, 
dated March 1, 1845, the Congress of the United States consented that 
"the territory, properly included in and rightfully belonging to the 
Republic of Texas," might be created into a new State, upon certain 
conditions, and by another joint resolution of Congress, approved 
December 29, 1845, which recited the acceptance of these conditions, 
Texas was admitted into the Union with "the territory properly included 
within and rightfully belonging to the Republic of Texas; "and that by 
the admission of Texas as one of the United States the boundary line 
aforesaid become the boundary line between the United States and the 
State of Texas.
And now your oratrix states that a period of forty years elapsed after 
the making of the said treaty of 1819, without any other action being 
had or taken looking to an agreement as to the now disputed boundary 
lines, than as above stated; without any official survey of any part of 
said boundary lines being made or any monument or other marks planted to 
designate any point or points set forth in either of said several 
treaties, when, from the year 1857 to 1859, under a contract with Jones 
and Brown and the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, for the United States, 
an astronomical survey was made of the one-hundredth meridian, west from 
Greenwich, being the boundary line between the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
country and Texas, the initial point of which said boundary line was 
determined to be at the intersection of said one hundredth meridian with 
what was designated at that time upon the maps of the General Land 
Office of the United States as the Red river, and a monument was 
thereupon established 30 chains due north from the north bank of said 
river, the Red river here referred to being what is now known as the 
Main Red river, as contradistinguished from what is known and delineated 
upon modern maps as the North fork of Red river.

And your oratrix further states that shortly after the action, survey, 
and determination last aforesaid, to wit, in the year 1859, joint 
commissioners, on the part of the United States on the one part and of 
the State of Texas on the other part, commenced the work of running the 
boundary lines between the Territories of the United States and the 
State Of Texas, beginning (in accordance with the act of Congress 
approved June 5, 1858)--

page 4
At a the point where the one hundredth degree of longitude west from 
Greenwich crosses Red river, and running thence north to the point where 
said one hundredth degree of longitude intersects the parrallel of 
thirty-six degrees and thirty minutes north latitude, to the point where 
it intersects the one hundred and third degree of longitude west from 
Greenwhich, and thence south with the said one hundred and third degree 
of longitude to the thirty-second parallel of north latitude, and thence 
west with the said thirty-second degree of north latitude to the Rio Grande.

The joint commission here referred to commenced the work assumed by 
them, but owing to personal differences which sprung up between them 
they did not long continue in co-operation in the work; but, in the year 
1860, the commissioner on the part of the United States, completed the
running of said boundary lines alone and without the aid and 
co-operation of the commissioner on the part of the State of Texas, and 
made report thereof to the General Land Office of the United States in 
the years 1861.

And your oratrix further states that the result and determination of the 
said surveys made by Jones and Brown aforesaid and the commissioner on 
the part of the United States, under the act of Congress approved June 
5, 1858, aforesaid, was to the effect that the true dividing and 
boundary line between the Indian territories of the United States and 
the State of Texas, in accordance with the terms of the said treaty of 
limits between the United States and Spain in 1819 and the subsequent 
confirmatory treaty between the United States and the United Mexican 
States, began where the one hundredth meridian touched the Main Red 
river aforesaid, running thence along the line or course of what is now 
known as the South Fork or Main Red river and said North fork of Red 
river belongs and is subject to the jurisdiction and control of the 
United States, and does not belong and
moved this page to 4 and 5
is not subject to the jurisdiction and control of the State of Texas, 
but your oratrix admits that no part of said boundary survey has ever 
been officially agreed upon or accepted by the governments as 
contemplated in the act of Congress authorizing this said survey.

page 5

And your oratrix further states that while the question of ownership and 
jurisdiction over said parcel of territory above described was and had 
been for years a matter of dispute between the
United States and the State of Texas; the said State of Texas assumed 
"to exercise certain jurisdiction and control over said parcel of 
disputed territory; and after the futile efforts to arrive at an 
agreement as to said boundary lines through the medium of a joint 
commission as aforesaid, and before the commissioners engaged in the 
surveyhad completed their labors or made report thereon, the State of 
Texas did, by its legislature, pass an act declaring----

That all the territory contained in the following limits, to wit: 
beginning at the confluence of Red river and Prairie Dog river; thence 
running up Red river, passing the mouth of South fork and following Main 
or North Red river to its intersection with the twenty third degree of 
west longitude; thence due north across Salt fork and Prairie Dog river, 
and thence follwing that river to the place of beginning, be, and the 
same is hereby, created into a county to abe know by the name and style 
of the county of Greer.

Which said act was approved on the 8th day of February, 1860; and has 
also by other acts of the officers of said State of Texas, acting of 
virtue of the acts of the legislature aforesaid, assumed and exercised 
control and jurisdiction over said tract of land or territory aforesaid.

And your oratrix further showeth that notwithstanding the assertions of 
authority over, and the exercise of jurisdiction by, the State of Texas, 
as aforesaid, over the parcel of land aforesaid, the conflict of claims 
between the United States and the State of Texas continue through all 
the period from the date of the first-known act of authority over said 
parcel of land by the State of Texas until the year 1882, without any 
other or further action being had or taken by and between the United 
States and the State of Texas to ascertain and determine the question of 
boundary aforesaid, when the legislature of the State of Texas passed an 
act which was approved on the 2nd day of May, 18812, entitled------


An act to provide for running and marking the boundary line between the 
State of Texas and the territory of the United States from the Southeast 
corner of said State to the degree of longitude 100 west from London and 
23 degrees west from Wahsington, as said line is described in a treaty
between the United States and Spain, of February 22, 1819, and for the 
payment of the expenses of such survey.
page 5
page 6
An act to authorize the appointment of a commision by the President of 
the United States to run and mark the boundary lines between a portion 
of the Indian Territory and the State of Texas, in connection with a 
similar commission to be appointed by the State of Texas.

The preamble and enacting clause of which last-mentioned acty are as 
follows:
Whereas the treaty between the United States and Spain, executed 
February 22, 1819, fixed the boundary line between the two countries 
west of the Mississippi river as follows: Beginning on the Gulf of 
Mexico at the mouth of the Sabine river, in the sea and continuing north 
along the western bank of the river to the thirty second degree of 
latitude; thence by a line due
page 7

page 8
boundary line of said treaty to the point where the one hundredth degree 
of west longitude crosses the same.
page 8
page 9
page 9
page 10
page11
page 11
page 11


as shown by its terms, to, "designate with precision the limits of the 
respective bordering territories
in North America" between said high contracting parties, and that it was 
provided in the third article of said treaty as is fully set out and 
shown in complainant's bill. This defendant further admits that at the 
date of said treaty, and at the date of its ratification and 
promulgation by the respective powers so contracting, Mexico constituted 
a part of province of said Kingdom of Spain, and that subsequently 
thereto, to wit, about the year 1824, Mexico became and was established as
an independent power and government, and as such independent power 
became subject to the terms
page 12 +
page 12
became subject to the terms and stipulations of said treaty of 1819 with 
respect to boundaries; and that the State of Texas was then, to wit, in 
1824, a part of the Mexican terrotory in manner and form substantially 
as stated in complainant's bill.

This defendent further admits as true, that on the 12 th day of January, 
1828, a treaty was concluded between the United States of America and 
the United Mexican States, which treaty was subsequently ratified and 
proclaimed as shown in the bill of complaint, and that the object and 
purpose of said treaty, as therein declared, is correctly stated in 
complainant's bill, to confirm the treaty of limits aforesaid of 1819, 
as still in force and binding between the United States of America and 
the United Mexican States.

And this defendant further admits, as alleged in the bill of complaint, 
that subsequent to the treaty last before mentioned between the United 
States of America and the United Mexican States to wit: in the year 
1837, Texas became and was recognized as an independent republic, and 
after the establishment of her independence and her recognition as a 
separate, independent power, to wit: on the 25th day of April, 1838, a 
treaty was concluded, and thereafter subsequently ratified between the 
United States of American and the Republic of Texas, wherein the treaty 
aforesaid of 1828 betwen the United States of America and the United 
Mexican States was expressly recognized as binding upon the Republic of 
Texas, the same having been entered into at a time when Texas formed a 
part of the said United Mexican States. And this defendant further 
admits that the preamble and body of said treaty between the United 
States of America and the Republic of Texas is correctly set out in 
complainant's bill. and that no further action was ever taken(save to 
mark and establish the eastern boundary line of Texas from the mouth of 
the Sabine river to Red river)until December a29th, 1845, when the 
Congress of the United States adopted a joint resolution admitting Texas 
into the Union, with it territory properly included in and righfully 
belonging to her, in manner and form as alleged in complainant's bill; 
and thereby Texas became a State of the Union, with its boundaries east, 
north and northwest as origiinalloy fioxed and designated in the treaty 
of 1819 aforesaid between the United States of America and the king of 
Spain, when Texas was a part of the Spanish possessions in North America.

page 13
But this defendant denies that for a period of forty years after the 
making of said treaty of 1819, no action was had or taken looking to an 
agreement as to the now disputed boundary lines, as alleged in the bill 
of complaint, which allegation implies that said boundary lines have 
been in dispute between the respective bordering nationsw and States for 
a period of more than forty years after the making of such treaty, when 
in truth and in fact no such controversy has existed until within a 
recent period, and the pretended claim of complainant to the territory 
now in controversy was first assumed and asserted nearly forty years 
after the making of the treaty of 1819 as aforesaid, and is based 
altogether upon assumptions first made by subordinate military and civil 
officers of compainant.
and geographical condition of the territory under discussion between the 
representatives of the high contracting parties to said treaty. That 
afor a long period of time before the making of said treaty, to
upon a condition of pretended geographical facts not existing at the 
date of said treaty, nor for a period of more than thirty years 
thereafter. This defendant avers, upon information and advice, and will 
offer proof to support such averments, that at the date of said treaty 
of 1819, the physical
page 13
page 14
page15
Page 15
of the treaty, is a large, fixed and permanent stream of water, 
traversing large dejposits of clay and gypsum for many miles, which give 
complexion to the waters, especially in times of freshets, causding them 
to be red whild the Kecheaquehonok, or what since 1852 has been called 
the south or Main fork of Red river, is a fickle, precarious stream, 
with low banks of sand, running only in times of rainfall, and at other 
times absolutely dry, and its waters discolored and whitish from the 
sandy and chalky character of the country it tranverses until it empties 
into Red river. Its waters are baleful and uinfit for human use, and the 
Indians of that region, and before the advent of the whites, avoided its 
banks and built their villages on the Rio Roxo, or what has been called 
since 1852 the North fork of Red river, along the travelled route 
between Santa Fe and Natchitoches aforesaid, where they were living at 
the date of said treaty, and were possessed of full knowledge as to the 
localities and names of all streams in that section of county.

page 16
This defendant further shows to the court that under the terms and 
provisions of the treaty aforesaid of 1819, it was expressly stipulated 
and understood, and agreed by and between the high contracting powers 
thereto that the limits of boundary between the respective nations 
should be as set forth with substantial accuracy in complainant's bill 
filed herein, on page 2 of said bill, to which reference is made for 
greater particularity; that the lines, calls, and objects therein 
designated, real or imaginary, and especially the line of the 
one-hundredth meridian of longitude west from London, was not 
necessarily the true line of said meridian, as the same might thereafter 
be fixed and determined by actual survey and calculation, but the line 
of said meridian. "as laid down in Melish's map of the United States, 
published at Philadelphia, improved to the 1st of January, 1818." 
whereby said Melish's map became and was and since the date of said 
treay, has ever been of controlling significance and importance in the 
construction of the boundary calls of said treatyu; and its delineations 
of natural objects and imaginaryu lines, in law, control and qualify 
such objects and lines as the same might thereafter be found to exist by 
actural survey. Now this defendant avers that in the delineation of the 
100th degree of longitude west from London upon the map of Melish 
aforesaid, said meridian is located more than one hundred miles east of 
the point where said merdian intersects the Rio Roxo or Red river as 
declared and established by Jones and Brown between the years 1857 and 
1859, under the employ of the Secretary of the Interior of complainant 
as alleged in the bill of complaint; and the acts and doings of said 
Jones & Brown in so designating said intersection, was, as this 
defendant is advised, without authority of law, and had and done without 
the knowledge,
part16
page 17
as a State of the Union had claimed and exercised complete ownership and 
dominion over said territory, including the territory now in 
controversy, by occupation of said territory by her armies, and by 
extending the operations of her laws over the same and by various other 
acts and declarations, until the happening of the matters and things now 
here to be shown and set forth.

This defendant shows to the court than on, to wit, the 1st day of March 
1845, the Congress of the United States, by joint resolution, proposed 
its consent that the territory properly icluded within, and rightly 
belonging to the Republic of Texas, might be erected into a new State to 
be called the State of Texas, upon the following conditions (among 
others), to wit:

1. That said State should be formed, subject to the adjustment by the 
United States,l of all questions of boundary that might arise with other 
governments.

2. That new States of convenient size, not exceeding four in number in 
addition to said State of Texas might thereafter be formed out of the 
territory of said Repubhlic of Texas, and that such States so formed out 
of that portion of said territory lying south of thirty-six degrees, 
thirty minutes of north latitude should be admitted into the Union, with 
or without slavery, as the people of such State asking admission, might 
desire; and that in such State so formed out of said territory north of 
said parallel of latitude, slavery or involuntary servitude( except for 
crime) should be prohibited.

page 17
Whereby the complainant, The United States of America, in the most 
solemn form of law, undertook, promised, and agreed that upon the 
acceptance of said propositions(and other propositionse embraced in said 
joint resolution) by the Republic of Texas in manner and form as therein 
designated, that she, The United States of America, would recognize the 
ownership fo the Republic of Texas in manner and form as therein 
designated, that she, The United States of America, would recognize the 
ownership of the Republic of Texas to extensive territories north of 
thirty-six degrees thirty minutes north latitude, as well as south of 
said parallel, and that she The United States of America would adjust 
and settle all questions of boundary between the Republic of Texas and 
all other governments, so that the territory properly included within 
and rightly belonging to the Republic of Texas might be erected into a 
State of the Union. And thereafter, to wit, on June 23d, 1845, the 
existing government of the Republic of Texas, through the Congress of 
said republic, by joint resolution entitled:
page 18
And thereafter, to wit, on the 9th day of September, A.D. 1850, 
complainant, The United States of America, in the execution of the terms 
and guarantees of annexation aforesaid, by solemn public act of her 
Congress, and with the approval of her President, conceded the right and 
dominion of defendant over all of said territory and ordered to purchase 
a portion of such right of territory, to wit, all that portion lying 
north of parallel thirty-six degrees thirty minutes north latitude, and 
east of the true one hundredth meridian of longitude west from Greenwich 
and north of what was then Red River, and also that portion of said 
territory lying west of the 103d meridian of longitude west from 
Greenmwich and north of the 32d parallel of north latituide, for the 
price and consideration of ten millions of dollars, and in legal and 
actual effect conceding to defendant the ownership and dominion of all 
the remainder of said territory, including the particular territory in 
controversy in this suit, which public act of Congress is substantially 
as follows to wit:

"An act proposing to the State of Texas the establishment of her 
northern and western boundaries, the relinquishment by the said State of 
territory claimed by her exterior to said bounjdaries and of all her 
claims upon the United States, and to establish a territorial government 
for New Mexico."

"Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled. That the following propositions 
shall be, and the same hereby are offered to
the State of Texas, which, when agreed to by the said State, in an act 
passed bythe 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.

with their sites, which became the property of the United States at the 
time of the annexation.

"Fourth. The United States in consideration of said establishment of 
boundaries, cession of claim to territory, and relinquishment of claims, 
will pay to the State of Texas the sum of ten millions of dollars in a 
stock bearing five per cent interest, and redeemable at the end of 
fourteen years, the interest payable half-yearly at the Treasure of the 
United States.

"Fifth. Immediately after the President of the United States shall have 
been furnished with an authentic copy of the act of the General Assembly 
of Texas accepting these propositions, he shall cause the stock to be 
issued in favor of the State of Texas, as provided for the fourth 
article of this agreement; Provided also, that no more than five 
millions of said stock shall be issued until the creditors of the State 
holding bonds and other certificates of Stock of Texas, for which duties 
on imports were specially pledged, shall first file at the Treasury of 
the United States releases of all claim against the United States for or 
on account of said bonds or certificates, in such form as shall be 
prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasure and approved by the 
President of the United States: Provided, that nothing herein contained 
shall be construed to impair or qualify anything contained in the third 
article of the second section of the joint resolution for annexing Texas 
to the United States, approved March first eighteen hundred and 
forty-five, either as regards number of States that may hereafter be 
formed out of the State of Texas or otherwise."

page 20
And thereafter, to wit, on the 25th day of November, 1850,and within the 
time limited in said act of Congress, in an act passed by the General 
Assembly of the State of Texas, said State of Texas, defendant herein, 
did agree to and accept said propositions in their entirety and did 
agree to be bound by the terms thereof, according to their true import 
and meaning; in the follwing public act of the legislature of Texas, to wit:

"An act accepting the propositions made by the United States to the 
State of Texas, in an act of the Congress of the United States, approved 
the 9th day of September, 1850, entitled 'An act proposing to the State 
of Texas the establishment of her northern and western boundaries, the 
relinquishment by said State of all territory claimed by her exterior to 
said boundaries, and of all
page 20
page 21
The preamble and enacting clause of which last mentioned are as follows:
Whereas the treaty between the United States and Spain executed February 
22, 1819, fixed the boundary line between the two countries west of the 
Mississippi river as follows: Beginning on the Gulf of Mexico at the 
mouth of the Sabine river; in the sea and continuing north along the 
western bank of the river to the thirty-second degree of latitude; 
thence by a line due north to a degree of latitude where it strikes the 
Rio Roxo of Natchitoches or Red river; thence following the course of 
the Rio Roxio westward toa the one hundredth degree of longitude west 
from London, and the twenty-third from Washingaton; thence crossing the 
said Red river, and running thence by a line due north to the River 
Arkansas; thence following the course of the southern bank of the 
Arkansas to its source in latitude 42 degrees north; and thence by that 
parallel of latitude to the South sea; the whole being as laid down in 
Melish's map of the United States, published at Philadelphia, improved 
to the 1st of January, 1818, and

Whereas a controversy exists between the United States and Texas as to 
the point where the one hundredth degree of longitude crosses the Red 
river, as described in the treaty; and
Whereas the point of crossing has never been ascertained and fixed by 
any authority competent to bind the United States and Texas; and
Whereas it is desirable that a settlement of this controversy should be 
had, to the end that the question of boundary now in dispute because of 
a difference opinion as to said crossing, may also be settled: Therefore,
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled. That the President of the 
United States be, and is hereby, authorized to detail one of more 
officers of the army, who in conjunction which such person or persons as 
may be appointed by the State of Texas, shall ascertain and mark the 
point where the one hundredth meridian of longitude crosses Red river, 
in accordance with the terms of the treaty aforesaid, and the person or 
persons appointed by virtue of this act shall make report of his or 
their action in the
page 35
action in the premises to the Secretarty the Interior, who shall 
transmit the same to Congrss at the next session thereof after such 
report may be made for action by Congress.

And your oratrix further states that commissioners were by virtue of the 
act of Congress and the act of the legislature of Texas aforesaid 
appointed by the respective governments for the purposes as set forth in 
said acts; that the joint commission assembled for the first time in 
Galveston, Texas, on February 23, 1886, from which time until the 16 day 
of August, 1886, said commission was engaged to formulation of plans and 
issues, the oral examination of witnesses, the examination of maps and 
documentary evidence pertinent to the matter of inquiry, the 
preparation, presentation, and discussion of propositions and issues the 
fact, and voting there on, whjen, upon the date last aforesaid, the said 
joint commission being unable to agree and reach a determination as to 
whether the stream now known as the North fork of Red River or that now 
called the South fork or Main Red river was the river referred to in the 
treaty of 1819 aforesaid, the said joint commission dissolved and 
adjourned sin die,with the agreement that each commission make its 
report to the proper authorities and await instructions.
And your oratrix further states that the result and determination on the 
part of the commissioners for the United States on the joint commission 
last aforesaid was----
That the Prairie Dog Town fork is the true boundary and that the 
monument should be placed at the intersection of the one hundredth 
meridian with this stream, which was reported to the Secretary of the 
Interior as provided by the act of Congress aforesaid, while the reusult 
and determination on the part of the commissioner for the State of Texas 
was----

And your oratrix further states that under and by virtue of the terms of 
the treaty of 1819 between the United States and Spain, she became 
entitled to possession of and jurisdiction over all that parcel or tract 
of land which lies between what has been herein designated as the 
Prairie Dog Town fork or Main Red river, and the North fork of Red 
river, which said parcel of land, according to the survey made by Jones 
& Brown, aforesaid, contains 1,511,576,170 acres, and is more accurately 
describes as the extreme portion of the indian Territory lying west of 
the North fork of Red river, and east of the one hundredth meridian of 
west longitude from Greenwich; that she has never voluntarily abandoned 
or relinquished such claim of title and jurisdiction, but has 
continuously asserted the same at all times since the ratification of 
said treaty of 1819 up to the present time, and does still assert the 
same; that said tract of land was never subject to the jurisdiction or 
claim of Spain subsequent to the treaty of 1819, aforesaid, nor was it 
subject to any claim or jurisdiction on the part of Mexico after her 
independence from Spain was secured and asserted.

Your oratrix further states that after the organization of said 
territory into a county by the name of Greer county, as aforesaid, the 
said county was designated as such upon certain maps of the State of 
Texas, but was never so recognized by or upon any map published by or 
under any authority of the United States; that on the 24th day of 
February, in the year of 1879, the Congress of the United States passed 
an act creatiang and establishing the northern judicial district of 
Texas; that in arranging said district, access was designated as 
aforesaid, and that by inadvertence the said territory was included in 
said judicial district as a part thereof; but your oratrix avers that 
said act was in no way intended and cannot be lawfully construed as a 
cession of said disputed territory to the State of Texas, or an 
abandonment of the claim of the United States thereto, nor was it so 
regarded by the State of Texas, as already shown in this bill, in the 
allegation that without any further action on the part of the Unaited 
States, the said State of Texas did, by the act of May 2, 1882; provide 
for the appointment of a commission for the purpose of ascertaining, 
among other

page 36
page 37
things, " whether the North fork of Red river, or the Prairie Dog fork 
of said river, is the true Red river designated in the treaty between 
the United States and Spain, made February 22, 1819."

And your oratrix further states that after the passage of the said act 
of Congress of 1885, aforesaid, and while the commissioners appointed 
thereunder were actually engaged in the duty devolving upon them as 
aforesaid, to wit, in the year 1886, certain residents of the disputed 
territory petitioned the Post Office Department of the United Sates 
describing themselves as residents of Greer county, Texas, and asking 
for the establishment of post offices respectively at Mangum and 
Frazier, in Greer county, Texas; that in said year 1886 the prayers of 
said petitions were granted, and acting upon the designation of locality 
as set forth in said petitions, said post offices were established and 
designated as in Greer county, Texas. but during the same year, 1886, 
and on the 27 day of December, in said year, it was discovered by the 
authorities of the Post Office Department that said post offices were 
located in the territory in dispute; that said territory was claimed by 
the United States; that it was designated and outlined on the maps of 
the General Land Office and of the Post Office Department as not within 
the limits of the State of Texas, but as a part of the Indian Territory 
of the United States; and thereupon, on said last mentioned day and 
date, in order to correct the error, the designations of said post 
offices were changed so as to locate them within the Indian Territory, 
and they have been from that date and are still only known, recognized, 
and described in orders and official acts of the Post Office Department 
as located in Indian Territory aforesaid, and all other post offices 
established, recognized, and described, and are still so described and 
recognized as within the Indian Territory.


And your oratrix further states thaht the said State of Texas has, 
without any right or title thereto, claimed, taken possession of, and 
endeavoared to extend its laws and jurisdiction over the said parcel or 
tract of land hereinbefore described, and does still claim, hold 
possession of, and exercise certain jurisdiction over the same, and has 
excluded the United States from possession of the jurisdiction over the 
same, in violation of the treaty rights of your oratrix as aforesaid; 
all of which your oratrix charges is a manifest invasion of her 
sovereign rights and tends to the disturbance of that amity and peace 
which ought to exist between the authorities of the United States and 
the State of Texas.
page 38