spectacular

the specific use of the word for source is the key

i agree with you completely

& glad we dont have to climb to the freakin ridge line too

it looks pretty steep up there

& no need to hurry with the maps

we have til august

& i appreciated your earlier post too

great research plus erudition in the service of precision

but i just dont have time to answer now
it is so silly here
& need to check some facts besides

later

or this may be beeps for a while

--- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Lowell G. McManus"
<mcmanus71496@m...> wrote:

> Mike,
>
> You wrote:
>
> > you have confirmed we need to begin from the rio source
> > whether
> > the natural sawanabori headspring source
> > or
> > the meta sawanabori thalweg point on the physical crest line
> > somewhere still unknown above the headspring source
>
> The Republic of Texas statute (which by typographical error

yesterday I dated as

> 1936 rather than 1836) has the boundary ascending the Rio Grande

from its mouth

> to its SOURCE, thence due north. Therefore, I would choose the

ultimate

> headspring as the departure point for the northward line. This is

because the

> word "source" comes to us from the French, in which one of its

meanings is a

> spring of water, being an Old French conjugation of the

verb "sourdre" (to

> rise).
>
> Where a boundary is specified to follow a river headward, then to

run along the

> ridge of a divide, we would be justified in ascending above the

spring; but

> where the source is specified as the beginning of a geogesic line,

I believe

> that we must use the spring itself.
>
> The question remains: "Which spring?" I will endeavor to gather a

few examples

> of maps that label different branches as the "Rio Grande," but I

won't have

> those for you before your library there closes for the weekend.
>
> Lowell G. McManus
> Leesville, Louisiana, USA