The Southwestern Historical Quarterly, Volume 62, July 1958 - April, 1959 Page: 358
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Southwestern Historical Quarterly
intoxicating liquors. The receiver ordered out of the area all
occupants who had no authorized connections with oil properties.
As well as curtailing the activities of the undesirable and lawless
elements, the receiver cared for the welfare of the people living
within the area by providing for a school, by constructing roads,
by improving sanitary conditions, and by eliminating fire haz-
ards. In addition, the receiver drilled oil wells, operated the oil
fields, and generally carried on the business of an oil producing
In the meantime, the Supreme Court was trying to settle one
of the most complicated boundary controversies on record. The
treaty signed by the United States and Spain in 1819 and ratified
by the United States Senate in 1821 was ambiguous regarding the
exact boundary line separating the territory of the two nations.
The treaty provided that the boundary line dividing United
States territory from Spanish possessions west of the Mississippi
River was to follow the west bank of the Sabine, the south bank
of the Arkansas, but "the course" of the Red River.1" This line
also became the boundary between Mexico and the United States;
it continued as the dividing line between the Republic of Texas
and the United States; and it was recognized as the boundary of
Texas when that state entered the Union.14
For years after Texas became a state, the middle of the river
was generally assumed to be the exact dividing line between
Oklahoma territory and Texas. But in the famous Greer County
case of 1896, the Supreme Court ruled that the south bank of
the main channel was the northern boundary of the Lone Star
State." Contending that the Court in this decision inadvertently
used the phrase "along the south bank," Texas raised the bound-
ary question again when the oil was found. The Court refused to
reverse its earlier decision, however, and after several appeals the
Court's last ruling rejecting the validity of the Texas claim was
handed down in 1923.1"
12United States Reports, CCLII, 372; Carpenter, "Red River Boundary Dispute,"
American Journal of International Law, XIX, 528. There was considerable opposi-
tion to the activities of the receiver. See Daily Oklahoman, May 18, 192o; May e9,
18Richard Peters (ed.), United States Statutes at Large (Boston, 1848) , VIII, 252ff.
141bid., 372, 511; ibid., IX, 1o8.
15United States Reports, CLXII, 1.
lIbid., CCLII, 372; ibid., CCLVI, 70; ibid., CCLX, 6o6.
Here’s what’s next.
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Periodical.
Texas State Historical Association. The Southwestern Historical Quarterly, Volume 62, July 1958 - April, 1959, periodical, 1959; Austin, Texas. (texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth101173/m1/425/: accessed March 21, 2018), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Texas State Historical Association.