well ok i am very glad i asked then
even if i seem to you driven when i am only mildly &
playfully curious
& might never have thought of this long forgotten
quest again if the cleanup hadnt been called for in
this mornings news
& glad again even if you did feel forced to clean up &
or answer for yourself
which of course you werent
& may i say again
it again seems to me you still havent yet really begun
to answer the question i actually asked & meant
while admittedly offering or reoffering yet another
titillating diversion
& out in the sabine river yet this time rather than up
the calcasieu
but in looking again at your earlier map
i do see more clearly now where the area of my
uncertainty is focussed
for i find i am not really even able to follow you as
far north as the 32nd parallel yet
whether by the route you show on that map ascending
bayou pierre
as it seems from this distance
or by the slightly more westerly route you seem to
favor in todays analysis
ascending the sabine red drainage divide
& really almost no matter by which route
if indeed either
for my more pressing questions really are
on what authority do you deliberately place the
northeast corner of the neutral ground anywhere on the
32nd parallel
& on what authority then proceed to extend its
northern limit westward along that parallel as far
west as the sabine & or 94th meridian
for that really is the bigger part of the entire
question of
how exactly do you get the neutral ground from the
natchitoches adaes area to the logansport area
let alone beyond
for i assume the little horned proruption at your
northwest corner is a slip of the pen rather than
anything deliberate
but that everything up to that point is quite
deliberate
or is it
here is how someone else gets there
http://www.enlou.com/maps/1805territorymap.htm
following the area outlined in black & labeled neutral
ground
but i have no more confidence in this map than in
yours much beyond arroyo hondo
for i do see the source of arroyo hondo here at around
31d47m30s
http://www.topozone.com/map.asp?lat=31.79261&lon=-93.19231&s=500&size=l&u=6&datum=nad27&layer=DRG
as stipulated by some unknown authority toward the end
here
http://www.enlou.com/places/neutralground.htm
but i dont know what is meant there by the bayou
pierre settlement
& i could just as easily imagine stopping the
specified due north line where it first reaches bayou
pierre in about nlat 31d49m17s here
http://www.topozone.com/map.asp?lat=31.82148&lon=-93.19291&s=500&size=l&u=6&datum=nad27&layer=DRG
or where it reaches the red river at about nlat
31d53m20s here
http://www.topozone.com/map.asp?lat=31.88885&lon=-93.19413&s=500&size=l&u=6&datum=nad27&layer=DRG
as stipulated by some other unknown authority in
footnote 7 here
http://72.14.209.104/search?q=cache:xgWTjE0DeCAJ:www.tsha.utexas.edu/publications/journals/shq/online/v049/n1/contrib_DIVL798.html+%22bayou+pierre+settlement%22&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1&client=safari
or else
running it as shown in the equally questionable but at
least historical map at the very end of the above link
etc
etc
because there must be other versions of the northern
reaches of the neutral ground available too
& beyond that
i do see bus&ss at least appearing to favor the
drainage divide on the louisiana state historical
diagram & the louisiana purchase diagram
while mentioning in text that spain still didnt
recognize the american claim west of the mississippi
river til 1819
which i trust is just a misstatement for
west of the red river til 1819
or west of the sabine red drainage divide til 1819
or west of a line running parallel to the red but a
few miles west of it
etc
yikes
but in any case i do understand there was some
consensus about the sabine red drainage divide
at least approximately
in those latitudes during those years
so i suppose i am prepared to accept some point upon
or near that divide as the answer to my question
but i dont undertand how the 32nd parallel could have
come into play
except as someones rationalization & sidestepping of
the apparent
f a c t
that the neutral ground actually had no northern limit
nor perhaps even any eastern limit much beyond arroyo
hondo
or i am deceived
& for this reason i see not even any stretchable latex
tripoint yet but just a void
now you may say
well isnt that silly & pointless
but i say
yes it certainly is
&
for lack of a real closing line & a real tripoint the
whole idea of a neutral ground or of any territory or
zone of any kind is lost at a certain point
so it is actually rather important as well as rather
silly to stretch this latex tripoint & this quest for
it
--- In
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Lowell G.
McManus" <lgm@...> wrote:
>
> The map that I promised was a map of the 1806-1819
de facto Neutral
> Ground, worked out as a practical solution between
the American and
> Spanish military officers in the field (quite
independent of their
> political bosses higher up). It is found in the BP
Files section with
> the name neutral.jpg and is explained in the last
two paragraphs of BP
> post 14285 at your third link below.
>
> I did not indicate any tripoint between the Neutral
Ground and the
> remainders of American Louisiana and Spanish Texas
because of
> uncertainty in the location of the international
boundary north of the
> Neutral Ground. Indeed, it was that same
uncertainty that necessitated
> both the Neutral Ground in the first instance and
the Adams-de Onís
> treaty that would replace it with a de jure boundary
in the second. The
> only reason that the de facto Neutral Ground was not
erected farther
> north was that the land north of the 32nd parallel
was not yet the
> subject of much interest (navigation on the Red
River being blocked by
> the "Great Raft," a 150-mile log jam that was
removed by 1839).
>
> However, if you are driven to find a tripoint (which
you undoubtedly
> are), I, as a resident of the former Neutral Ground,
can offer some
> analysis that might be helpful.
>
> In the Louisiana Purchase of 1803, the USA bought
from France the French
> claim to Louisiana, without specifying any western
boundary. Most
> strictly, that could be interpreted historically as
the land west of the
> Mississippi River that drained into the same. This
means that the
> drainage divide between the basins of the Red and
Sabine rivers would
> have been the boundary. The USA was desirous of the
most liberal
> (western) interpretation of the boundary of
Louisiana as it could put
> over on the Spanish. Thus, the 1804 creation of the
Territory of
> Orleans was "to extend west to the western boundary
of the said
> cession." In 1812 when Louisiana was admitted to
the Union, its western
> boundary was specified at the middle of the Sabine
River to the 32nd
> parallel, and from there due north. Note that this
was in the midst of
> the life span of the de facto military Neutral
Ground and was seven
> years before the 1819 Adams-de Onís treaty would
place the de jure
> US-Spanish boundary on the west bank of the Sabine
River to the 32nd
> parallel and thence northward. So, it is clear
that, in 1812, the
> Congress was admitting into the Union prospectively
the western fringes
> of Louisiana that it hoped eventually to obtain de
jure. The US waited
> until after the 1819 treaty was fully ratified in
1821 before it
> occupied the erstwhile Neutral Ground militarily
with the establishment
> of Fort Jesup in 1822.
>
> So, if you forced me to draw you a tripoint at the
northern end of the
> Neutral Ground, I would place it in De Soto Parish
at the intersection
> of the Sabine-Red drainage divide with the 32nd
parallel, centered
> roughly six miles southeast of Mansfield. Actually,
the complexity of
> the drainage divide in that vicinity seems that it
would produce three
> tripoints, with a Spanish exclave surrounded by the
USA and the Neutral
> Ground. Of course, it never came to that.
>
> Of more fascination to me is the anomaly that
existed in the western
> half of the Sabine River. Since the 1812 admission
of Louisiana had
> prematurely placed its western boundary at the
middle of the river, and
> the 1819 treaty placed the international boundary on
the west bank, that
> left the western half of the Sabine as unorganized
territory of the
> United States until 1848. That's when the Congress
authorized the State
> of Texas (annexed three years earlier) to extend its
jurisdiction to the
> middle of Sabine Pass, Sabine Lake, and the Sabine
River to the 32nd
> parallel. That narrow part of the State of Texas,
in which I swam three
> weeks ago, was never part of the Republic of Texas!
>
> Lowell G. McManus
> Leesville, Louisiana, USA
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "aletheia kallos" <aletheiak@...>
> To: <boundarypoint@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 11:52 AM
> Subject: [BoundaryPoint] stretching the quest for a
real stretchable
> latex tripoint to stretch
>
>
> > this fresh news item about an imminent neutral
ground
> > cleanup party
> >
http://www.2theadvocate.com/features/travel/4201376.html
> > jogged my memory back to this excellent golden
oldie
> >
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BoundaryPoint/message/14259
> > which you may also recall
> > along with its equally illustrious second shoe
> > dropping
> >
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BoundaryPoint/message/14285
> >
> > but which still left one guessing & reaching &
> > stretching for any handle at all on the elusive
but
> > allegedly real
> > de facto latex neutral ground tripoint
> > which actually lived
> > or else was really stillborn
> > if thats not stretching it in this case too
> > during the first decades of the 19th century
> >
> > my guess is
> > the quest got stretched into an unresolved
sawanabori
> > of the calcasieu
> > which however interesting & possibly even
contributory
> > to an ultimate resolution of this supposed
lalatxtx
> > tripoint
> > came to a dead stop there in any case
> > like a snapped elastic band
> >
> > but all efforts to pin la latex tex down thus far
> > reported here
> > i believe
> > & all my subsequent efforts too
> > have resulted only in establishing a vague triarea
&
> > triline at the farthest reaches of the lalatxtx
condo
> > or nondo
> > extending perhaps all the way from about zwolle to
> > about logansport
> > & thus perhaps comprising several hundreds of
square
> > miles of 1806lalatx1819 territorial uncertainty
too
> > rather than any specific & exact 1806lalatxtx1819
> > tripoint
> >
> > like say very roughly all the sabine riverfront on
> > this map
> >
http://www.topozone.com/map.asp?lat=31.93501&lon=-93.93668&s=250&size=l&u=4&datum=nad27&layer=DRG
> > or better yet if zoomed out once or twice
> >
> >
> > but did i miss the promised tripoint treasure map
> > or hasnt it surfaced yet
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com