Some of us study ghost boundaries and their tripoints, but here is an
interesting study in stillborn boundaries and tripoints.
In 1853, Frederick Law Olmsted (then a 31-year-old journalist, later the
father of American landscape architecture) and his younger brother Dr.
John Hull Olmsted undertook an extensive trip through the state of
Texas, admitted to the Union from the status of an independent republic
just eight years earlier. The trip resulted in a wonderful book
entitled A JOURNEY THROUGH TEXAS; OR, A SADDLE-TRIP ON THE SOUTHWESTERN
FRONTIER, published under Frederick's name as author, but actually
prepared "with free scope of expression and personality" by John from
Frederick's journal while the latter worked as a literary agent in
England. It was published in 1857 by Dix, Edwards, & Co. of New York
and was reprinted in 1978 by the University of Texas Press.
In a concluding chapter entitled "REGIONAL CHARACTERISTICS," Olmsted
writes:
___________________
NEW STATES
The actual limits of the State of Texas include an area of 274,362
square miles--or a territory greater than the aggregate areas of
Kentucky, Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York and all
New England. This immense region, as is well known, is to be divided
ere long into five States, according to the terms of the Joint
Resolution of Annexation. [The resolution is quoted in a footnote
referenced here.]
The boundaries of these new States are, of course, not yet mapped, but
in local acceptance they are clearly enough indicated. The vaguest
tavern conversation assumes a natural antagonism and future division
between Eastern and Western Texas. The limiting line is not drawn--the
people of the East assuming the Trinity as their western boundary, while
those of the West call all beyond the Colorado, Eastern Texas. This
leaves between the Trinity and the Colorado, Central Texas, a convenient
and probable disposition.
Northeastern Texas, or the region above the navigable heads of the gulf
rivers, and having its principal commercial relations with Red River, is
a fourth district, also distinct from the body of the State. The line
of the proposed Pacific railroad along the thirty-second parallel,
extending upon the map from the Brazos to Shrieveport [sic] in
Louisiana, may indicate its southern limit.
Northwestern Texas remains. It will still be the largest State of the
Union, as its great plains are only adapted, so far as known, for a
sparse population of herdsmen and shepherds. It would extend as far
east, perhaps, as a line drawn north from the Brazos at 32°, and as far
south as a line drawn from the same point to the mouth of the Pecos.
But political necessities, and local jealousies and rivalries will
control the limits as well as the time of erection of these five States,
and the outlines sketched can only indicate the crystallizing
tendencies, and serve for purposes of description. ["Euphonious
appellations" for the five states are proposed in a footnote referenced
at this point. For the Northeast: Caddonia, Sabina, Waco, or Comanche.
For the East: Angelina, Lanana, or Panola. For the Central: Matagorda
or Navasota. For the West: Bexar, Atascosa, Uvalde, or Bandera. For
the Northwest: Estacada.]
___________________
Note that the Olmsted trip occurred after the reduction of Texas by sale
of lands west and north of its modern boundaries to the federal
government as part of the Compromise of 1850.
On the attached map, I have illustrated the prospective boundaries as
delimited by Olmsted. This division of Texas would produce six inland
and two marine tripoints in addition to those common to modern Texas.
All would be wet. Those inland tripoints internal to modern Texas would
be within the Trinity, Brazos, and Colorado Rivers, and those along the
bounds of modern Texas would be within the Sabine and Red rivers and the
Rio Grande. It is interesting to note that the proposed state
boundaries would split both of the modern major cities of Austin and
Fort Worth (the latter of which aptly bills itself as "where the West
begins.")
This particular proposal for the division (or multiplication) of Texas
into five states was derailed by the coming of the War Between the
States (1861-1865). No congressional authorization for a division
existed in the Confederate States of America. Of course, this is far
from the only historic proposal for the division of Texas. For details
on others, both earlier and later, see
http://tinyurl.com/3db3z .
Lowell G. McManus
Leesville, Louisiana, USA