Great digging, Mike! I agree with almost all of your conclusions, particularly
your new interpretation of the "Initial Monument" having been Atwood's--in light
of the fact that his work seems to have been driven by a Yuma v. Maricopa suit
in the same year.
Your only conclusion with which I tentatively disagree is that the Atwood survey
never extended north or south of the then Maricopa-Yuma segment. My belief
otherwise is based on the statutory description of the boundaries of La Paz (
http://tinyurl.com/6bkg9 ), modern Yuma (
http://tinyurl.com/4fqxh ), and Pima
(
http://tinyurl.com/52mbm toward the end) counties. Atwood probably set his 52
monuments pursuant to order of the Arizona Supremes, but unless the legislature
knows not whereof it speaks, he does seem to have surveyed farther both
northward and southward.
Lowell G. McManus
Leesville, Louisiana, USA
----- Original Message -----
From: "aletheiak" <aletheiak@...>
To: <BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 3:35 PM
Subject: [BoundaryPoint] paleo lamaya initial monument & mapiyu corner cases
closed i think
>
>
> aha
> it turns out there actually was a yuma county vs maricopa county
> 1918 border suit
> so the accumulated puzzle pieces now strongly suggest
> that it was the arizona supreme court that directed the atwood
> survey to do whatever it did in 1918
>
>
> & that this survey concerned naturally mayu & mayu only
> rather than everything south of the santa maria river & north of
> mexico
> as has been widely presumed
>
>
> & if this is true then atwood must have had to use his own original
> determinations for the mapiyu & mayayu tripoints for his mayu
> terminal points
>
>
> & so the mystery initial monument near lamaya must have been his own
> initial as well as terminal monument
> & thus actually the 52nd marker in his continuous series
>
>
> & this was presumably done without prejudice as to the actual
> position of either tripoint since it was only a mayu thing
>
> in the case of mapiyu i surmise the original atwood position stuck &
> never moved because it was based in the public land grid
>
> which btw on further examination also seems to be the cause of the
> jog & yaw beginning at mapiyu too & continuing southward to mexico
>
> but in the case of mayayu aka lamaya
> thompson evidently was empowered by the supreme court to establish
> the tripoint in 1924
> leaving atwoods 1918 initial & terminal rock 50 yards off
> & just an oddball & technically unauthorized yet duly marked point
> on laya
> indeed possibly the only monumented point on laya
> if only it still existed
>
>
> so
> just wanted to get that much off my chest
> tho there are more new details perhaps best left unreported too
> & tho it doesnt bag us a rock solid arizona tricounty point yet
> but it has been an education & a trip & possibly even a help
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>