Mike,
Only the records of the 1849 survey would tell us just exactly where in the
confluence of the Gila and the Colorado that the initial point of the geodesic
line was placed. My notion that it was not in the middle of the Colorado is
based upon my reading of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo of 1848. I can't say
whether the commissioners on the ground interpreted it my way when they surveyed
the geodesic.
First, the treaty gives a description of the whole boundary, then it more
carefully describes the geodesic "in order to preclude all difficulty in tracing
upon the ground the limit separating Upper from Lower California."
Before I quote these descriptions, please realize that they were written in a
suburb of Mexico City by people who had never been to Yuma. The Gila was
envisioned as an east-west river, and the Colorado as a north-south river. Also
realize that the Colorado was not being made a boundary of any kind in this
treaty. The MXUS boundary would consist of the middle of the Gila and the
geodesic to the Pacific.
The treaty describes the boundary from the Gulf of Mexico and eventually comes
to the Gila. "...thence down the middle...of the said [Gila] river, until it
empties into the Rio Colorado; thence across the Colorado, following the
division line between Upper and Lower California, to the Pacific Ocean."
In the more precise description of the geodesic, intended to assist the
surveyors in finding it, the treaty specifies "a straight line drawn from the
middle of the Rio Gila, where it unites with the Colorado, to a point on the
coast of the Pacific Ocean..."
In no part of the treaty is the "middle" of the Colorado mentioned. If the
Colorado were being made a boundary, then it would be reasonable for the middle
of the Gila to join onto its middle. However, the boundary comes down the
middle of the Gila until it "empties into" or "unites with" the Colorado, then
becomes a geodesic that runs "across" the Colorado and on to the Pacific. This
is why I think that the geodesic began, or should have begun, in the middle of
the mouth of the Gila, regardless of the location of the middle of the Colorado.
When applied to the landscape, we find that the Gila intersected the Colorado at
some now indefinite point on a great looping meander of the latter (not the
counter-clockwise one that skirts Yuma to the north, but the clockwise one that
occupied the bottoms northeast of Yuma before the river was channelized).
Depending on the orientation at the time of the two rivers within those bottoms,
a geodesic from within the mouth of the Gila could have crossed the middle of
the Colorado once or thrice on its way toward the Pacific. If once, then the
portion of the New Mexico Territory (once formed in 1850) that was north of the
now- ghost geodesic in today's northern Yuma would have been a pene-enclave
connected to the rest of the territory by half the width of the Colorado (with
only one CAMXNM). If thrice, then it would have been an enclave of the New
Mexico Territory surrounded by California along the Colorado and Mexico along
the geodesic (and there would have been three CAMXNM's). California's
boundaries at admission in 1850 were simply the middle of the Colorado and the
portion of the geodesic west thereof.
Lowell G. McManus
Leesville, Louisiana, USA
----- Original Message -----
From: "acroorca2002" <orc@...>
To: <BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 11:46 AM
Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re: mxn trip?
ok forget my comments about the thalwegs
which i have deleted from my question below
since they wouldnt have applied here in the 19th century in any case
doh
but why would the geodesic mxus line not have started from the point
where the middle of the gila meets the middle of the colorado
& why would it not therefore have produced a camxnm trijunction there
whatever the actual status of the left bank territory north of the
geodesic may have been
dont all the texts consistently refer to the middles of these rivers
--- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "m06079" <barbaria_longa@h...>
wrote:
> --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Lowell G. McManus"
> <mcmanus71496@m...> wrote:
> > Adam,
> >
> > You wrote:
> >
> > > In other words, the line started at the confluence of the two
> rivers,
> > > but the border started where that line crossed the Colorado.
> >
> > Not exactly. The MXUS boundary 1848-1853 descended the Gila to a
> point at "the
> > middle of the Rio Gila where it unites with the Colorado" and
from
> that point
> > took a bee-line for the Pacific below San Diego, crossing the
> Colorado several
> > miles downstream at the current AZCAMX tripoint.
> >
> > So, the MXUX boundary of 1848 came down the middle of the Gila
and
> just touched
> > the south bank of the Colorado in the mouth of the Gila
this is the detail i am asking about
why do you believe it stopped or turned there at the south bank
rather than continued down the middle of the gila to the middle of
the colorado before doing so
, not making
> tripoint
> > there with the boundary of California
>
> why do you say it just touched the south bank
>
> why didnt it reach the middle of the confluence
> & thus form a new mexico crossclave rather than a mere peneclave
>
> i have a message about this still lost in the ether
> in which i considered the possibility that this left bank area
might
> have belonged to california
> or have fallen back to old mexico til 1853
>
> i am still not sure which of these 3 or 4 probabilities might
> actually have obtained
> but for starters it would help to know why you rule out a new
mexico
> border cross at the 1849 midstream confluence
>
>
> (as admitted in 1850), which was the
> > middle of the Colorado. Thus, the broad bend in the Colorado
that
> now skirts
> > the northern end of Yuma was a pene-enclave of the New Mexico
> Territory
> > (established 1850), joined to the rest of NM only by half the
width
> of the
> > Colorado at the confluence of the Gila. The southern boundary of
> NM was
> > described as "Beginning at a point in the Colorado River where
the
> boundary line
> > with the Republic of Mexico crosses the same; thence eastwardly
> with the said
> > boundary line..." This would have carried it through the
northern
> end of
> > current Yuma on the vestigial cadastral line that we see on
modern
> maps and then
> > up the Gila eastward.
> >
> > The Gadsden Purchase of 1853 added to the US the land between the
> MXUS boundary
> > described above and the current MXUS boundary. This erased the
> part of MXUS
> > that is now the ghost line through Yuma, causing MXUS to go down
> the Colorado
> > southward from modern AZCAMX to the modern MXUS geodesic segment
> that you
> > mention below, thus enlarging the New Mexico Territory.
> >
> > > I wonder how the western end of that line was chosen. It seems
> likely
> > > that it was just chosen as a location that allowed for the area
> > > around San Diego Bay to be in the USA but not much more. Seems
odd
> > > that they didn't set the border on the Pacific at, say, the
mouth
> of
> > > the Tijuana River, which would be a couple miles north of where
> it is.
> >
> > The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo of 1848 specified "a point on the
> coast of the
> > Pacific Ocean, distant one marine league due south of the
> southernmost point of
> > the port of San Deigo, according to the plan of said port made in
> the year 1782
> > by Don Juan Pantoja, second sailing-master of the Spanish fleet,
> and published
> > at Madrid in the year 1802, in the atlas to the voyage of the
> schooners Sutil
> > and Mexicana; of which plan a copy is hereunto added, signed, and
> sealed by the
> > respective plenipotentiaries." [Shades of Mason and Dixon
hunting
> the
> > southernmost point in Philadelphia!]
> >
> > > While we're at it, I wonder what the history of the geodetic
line
> > > that forms the WNW/ESE southern border of Arizona/Gadsden
Purchase
> > > is. How was it chosen? A map of Baja California shows Mexico
Hwy.
> 2
> > > extending for about 15 miles WNW of the azbcso tripoint, roughly
> > > along the same alignment as the WNW/ESE line in question. Hmm.
> >
> > The whole purpose of the Gadsden Purchase was for the US to
acquire
> a desirable
> > railroad route. James Gadsden was, in fact, a railroad executive
> who was
> > appointed Minister to Mexico for the negotiations. The boundary
> that finally
> > emerged was rather arbitrary, designed to enclose the needed
> railroad route.
> > The geodesic segment has its eastern terminus at 31°20" N. Lat.
and
> 111° W.
> > Long. It runs "thence in a straight line to a point on the
> Colorado River
> > twenty English miles below the junction of the Gila and Colorado
> Rivers. It has
> > no vestige west of the Colorado. Mexico highway 2 roughly
> parallels the
> > geodesic segment. After crossing the Colorado, it continues in
the
> same
> > direction, straight across the desert, aimed generally at
Mexicali.
> >
> > Lowell G. McManus
> > Leesville, Louisiana, USA
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/