Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: New Wall -- discussion point<br/>
Date: Jan 18, 2004 @ 01:51<br/>
Author: Lowell G. McManus (&quot;Lowell G. McManus&quot; &lt;mcmanus71496@...&gt;)<br/>
<a href="12871.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Topic&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="12880.htm">Next</a>&emsp;[<a href="topic12823.htm">All</a> Posts]<br/>
<a href="12873.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Time&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="12875.htm">Next</a><br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-105874370">Mike wrote:<br/>
<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; again i am not arguing with you but just trying to complete your<br/>
&gt; flake off list & also to get into the mind of the interior department<br/>
&gt; lawyers who really for some reason believed that the right to<br/>
&gt; recommend or request the division rested constitutionally with<br/>
&gt; congress<br/>
<br/>
 </span></blockquote>I wonder how many lawyers the Geological Survey really has?  I somehow doubt<br/>
that this was vetted by lawyers.  I think lawyers usually consult forensic<br/>
geographers and historians on such matters, not the other way around.  For<br/>
whatever it&#39;s worth, Van Zandt doesn&#39;t credit any lawyers or legally-oriented<br/>
agencies in his preface on page V of the 1976 edition.<br/>
<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; i am still trying to guess why they believed this<br/>
<br/>
 </span></blockquote>Editions of the BUS&SS were issued in 1885, 1900, 1923, 1930, 1964, and<br/>
1976--the last two by Van Zandt.  I have 1964, and several of us have 1976.<br/>
Both have the same statement about congressional instigation, but the 1964<br/>
edition has a footnote citing a 1930 speech in the House of Representatives by<br/>
John Nance Garner.  The odd thing about the footnote is its number:  62a.  There<br/>
are only six sublettered footnotes in the entire book, which suggests the<br/>
impromptu inclusion of the cited matter at some point.<br/>
<br/>
Being based on a 1930 speech, the statement about Texas must have entered the<br/>
BUS&SS in either the 1930 or 1964 issue.  We know that Garner was a great<br/>
proponent of the division of Texas, but he was also a powerful leader in the<br/>
Congress.  Perhaps he ascribed the power of instigation to the Congress in order<br/>
to enlarge his own power.  I&#39;d dearly love to have access to the Garner speech,<br/>
which is in the Congressional Record of June 17, 1930, page 11459.  It might<br/>
settle something.  Garner&#39;s papers would be of no help.  His wife burned them<br/>
all!<br/>
<br/>
Lowell G. McManus<br/>
Leesville, Louisiana, USA</div>