The reason nmtx then turns east at the northern line of tx for three miles
until it reaches the ok n/s line is that north of tx, the 103rd meridian is
the ok panhandle west line. Yes?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lowell G. McManus [mailto:mcmanus71496@...]
> Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2005 9:31 PM
> To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: TX proposes "free-for-all brawl" with
> NM over land
>
>
>
> By even considering any suit on this issue, New Mexico is
> engaging in a total
> waste of time, money, and breath. The reasons go far beyond
> the doctrine that
> long-unchallenged boundaries usually stand.
>
> The State of Texas sold the land west and north of its
> current boundaries to the
> United States in 1850, and surveys were done by John H. Clark
> in 1859 and 1860.
> His work was officially accepted by both Texas and the feds.
> Since that was
> long before the existence of New Mexico, that settles it.
> Furthermore, a joint
> resolution of the Congress dated February 16, 1911,
> proclaimed "these boundary
> lines as run and marked by John H. Clark in 1859-60 shall
> remain the true
> boundary lines of Texas and New Mexico." Another joint
> resolution of August 21,
> 1911, required the proposed state of New Mexico to accept these Texas
> boundaries. When New Mexico's statehood was effective
> January 6, 1912, it got
> the land to which it was entitled. The federal government
> had no land east and
> south of Clark's lines to give it.
>
> Lowell G. McManus
> Leesville, Louisiana, USA
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Roger_Rowlett" <roger.rowlett@...>
> To: <BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2005 9:40 PM
> Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re: TX proposes "free-for-all brawl"
> with NM over land
>
>
> >
> >
> > I have an article with several links on my americasroof
> blog on this:
> >
> http://americasroof.com/wp/archives/2005/03/13/new-mexico-sues-texas/
> >
> > The upshot is that New Mexico's own fiscal analysis of this bill to
> > claim land 3 miles east of the current border to the 103rd meridian
> > would probably be considered frivolous since the Courts have ruled
> > that if a state border goes unchallenged for "a long course
> of years"
> > then it becomes the defacto border. Texas permitted New Mexico to
> > enter the Union in 1912 on condition of dropping the claim.
> > Ironically though the Oklahoma, New Mexico, Texas tripoint
> jogs in to
> > the meridian.
> >
> >
> > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Lowell G. McManus"
> > <mcmanus71496@m...> wrote:
> >> The Commissioner of the General Land Office of the State of Texas
> > has proposed a
> >> "free-for-all brawl" between the Senates of the two states over the
> > lost land
> >> that New Mexico is griping about.
> >>
> >> See the third of three subtopics in the article at
> >> http://tinyurl.com/6mb7d .
> >>
> >> Lowell G. McManus
> >> Leesville, Louisiana, USA
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> --------------------~-->
> Give the gift of life to a sick child.
> Support St. Jude Children's Research Hospital's 'Thanks & Giving.'
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/5iY7fA/6WnJAA/Y3ZIAA/WkiolB/TM
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ------~->
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>