e
533
Uss-
!-NRLF
B 3
r-
oo
o
o
o
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
GENERAL LAND OFFICE
HISTORICAL SKETCH
OF
"LOUISIANA"
D THE LOUISIANA PURCHASE
BY
FRANK BOND
Chief Clerk General Land Office
WITH A STATEMENT OF OTHER
ACQUISITIONS
WASHINGTON
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
1912
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
GENERAL LAND OFFICE
HISTORICAL SKETCH
OF
"LOUISIANA"
AND THE LOUISIANA PURCHASE
BY
FRANK BOND
Chief Clerk General Land Office
WITH A STATEMENT OF OTHER
ACQUISITIONS
WASHINGTON
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
1912
This publication may be purchased from the Superintendent of
Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C., for
10 cents.
333
TiSS
LOUISIANA PURCHASE PROGRESS MAPS OF THE
UNITED STATES.
INTRODUCTION.
A series of five maps of the United States showing the original Lou-
isiana and the changes in its boundary during the 137 years between
1682, the date of La Salle s discovery, and 1819, the date of the
purchase of Florida, formed an interesting part of the exhibit of the
General Land Office at the Louisiana Purchase Exposition held at
St. Louis, Mo., in 1904. Differences of opinion have prevailed as to
the extent of Louisiana as purchased from France. It is believed
that these are due, first, to a misconception of the scope of La SahVs
discovery and proclamation, and, second, to a misunderstanding of
the real significance of the political acts of the United States, between
1803 and 1819, affecting that part of La Salle s Louisiana which
extended along the Gulf coast east of the Mississippi River. It is
submitted, as to the former, that the " Louisiana Purchase" of 1803
did not include territory beyond the limits of the original Louisiana,
and, as to the latter, that all Spanish doubts as to ownership were
resolved and permanently settled by the political acts of the United
States following the purchase from France, but antedating the
purchase of Florida from Spain. It is believed, also, that a true
picture of the extent and location of La Salle s Louisiana is shown upon
map No. 1. This picture greatly assists one to understand the
phrase "the whole of Louisiana" which was used in subsequent
treaties of cession.
In the brief discussion of each map which follows no effort has
been made to harmonize the conflicting views held and heretofore
published by numerous writers upon the subject of Louisiana or the
"Louisiana Purchase." These views are as diverse as their author
ship is numerous. This is not surprising when it is understood that
the common effort has been aimed at solving the questions of terri
torial limits of Louisiana, as this province passed from one State to
another, without first attempting to fix the original limits of the
territory thus transferred. To this fact, probably, more than any
other, may the failure to reach a common conclusion be attributed.
4300S 12 3
4 LOUISIANA PURCHASE PROGRESS MAPS.
TERRITORY OF LOUISIANA, 1682-1762 (MAP NO. 1).
The greater colored area shown upon this map is based upon the
discoveries of La Salle and his proclamation made at the mouth of the
Mississippi River on April 9, 1682. This proclamation was made in
the presence of the entire party, under arms, who chanted the Te
Deum, the Exaudiat, and the Domine salvum fac Regem. After a
salute of firearms and cries of "Vive le Roi," La Salle erected a col
umn, and while standing near it said in a loud voice :
In the name of the most high, mighty, invincible, and victorious prince, Louis the
Great, by the grace of God, King of France and of Navarre, fourteenth of that name,
this ninth day of April, one thousand six hundred and eighty-two, I, in virtue of the
commission of His Majesty which I hold in my hand, and which may be seen by all
whom it may concern, have taken, and do now take, in the name of His Majesty and
of his successors to the crown, possession of this country of Louisiana, the seas, harbors,
ports, bays, adjacent straits, and all the nations, people, provinces, cities, towns,
villages, mines, minerals, fisheries, streams, and rivers comprised in the extent of said
Louisiana, from the mouth of the great river St. Louis on the eastern side, otherwise
called Ohio, Aligin, Sipore, or Chukagona, and this with the consent of the Chaonanons,
Chickachas, and other people dwelling therein, with whom we have made alliance;
as also along the river Colbert, or Mississippi, and rivers which discharge themselves
therein, from its source, beyond the country of the Kious or Nadoucessions, and this
with their consent, and with the consent of the Motantes, Illinois, Mesiganeas, Natches,
Koroas, which are the most considerable nations dwelling therein, with whom also we
have made alliance, either by ourselves or by others in our behalf, as far as its mouth.
by the sea, or Gulf of Mexico, about the twenty-seventh degree of the elevation of the
North Pole and also to the mouth of the river of Palms; upon the assurance which we
have received from all these nations that we are the first Europeans who have descended
or ascended the said river Colbert; hereby protesting against all who may in future
undertake to invade any or all of these countries, people, or lands, above described, to
the prejudice of the rights of His Majesty, acquired by the consent- of the nations herein
named. Of which, and all that can be needed, I hereby take to witness those who
hear me and demand an act of the notary as required by law. 1
Title to French territory in the Mississippi Valley and along the
Gulf of Mexico was based upon this voyage and proclamation of
La Salle. These acts of La Salle were, in fact, the foundation of
French ownership, and have been so considered by all nations since
1682. The Louisiana thus claimed embraced two areas of contigu
ous territory first, the territory drained by the Mississippi River,
with all of its tributaries, and second, the territory between the
Mississippi River and the River Palms. The wording of the proc
lamation is simple and direct, and its meaning seems incapable of
distortion or of being misunderstood. It appears evident that La
Salle had no information of territory beyond the sources of the Mis-
1 This translation of La Salle s proclamation is taken from Spark s Life of La Salle, published at Boston,
Mass., 1844. Francis Parkman s translation of the proclamation, in his "Discovery of the Great West,"
1869 (Boston: Little, Brown & Co.), agrees with the above, Except that he omitted the names of the treaty
tribes, but refers to such omissions in a footnote, pp. 282, 283, and says: " A copy of the original of the Proces
Verbal (the proclamation) is before me. It bears the name of Jacques de la Metairie, notary of Frontenac,
who was one of the party." Translations, in whole or in part, of the proclamation of La Salle, by numerous
other authors have been examined by the writer, but in no essential particular did any of these transla
tions differ from those of Sparks or Parkman quoted or referred to above.
LOUISIANA PURCHASE PROGRESS MAPS. 5
sissippi River and it tributaries to the west, or, if he knew of such
territory, he purposely excluded any claim to it for France. The
western boundary of the original Louisiana is therefore traced along
the summit of the watershed which defines the drainage basin of the
Mississippi in that region, viz, around the headwaters both of the
Red River and the Arkansas with their tributaries, and the Missouri
River with all of its great tributaries from the west and southwest to
the present northern United States boundary.
In the effort made to locate the western boundary of La Salle s
Louisiana many untenable claims have been put forth by geographers.
In one of those claims the province was carried far beyond the drainage
basin of the Mississippi River; in fact, across the Rocky Mountains
to the Pacific coast in the Northwest. In another, it is assumed that
because France at one time claimed the Gulf coast to St. Bernard
(now Matagorda) Bay, by reason of La Salle s later discoveries, this
territory should be added to the original Louisiana. A third, while
rejecting the Pacific coast extension, selected the Rio Grande as the
southwestern boundary, but, lacking in courage of conviction, pub
lished maps restricting the limits on the west by the Spanish- American
compromise line of 1819. The great majority of geographers now
reject the Pacific coast extension, but there remains a disposition to
include the Rio Grande country. A careful study of available his
torical data reveals claims of France at one time extending only to the
divide between the Colorado River and the Rio Grande at another
time to the Rio Grande itself and with spiritual jurisdiction to the
Pacific coast. In the negotiations with France for the purchase of
Louisiana, Napoleon, Talleyrand, and Marbois admitted great
obscurity as to boundaries and declared their inability to throw any
light upon the subject. The negotiations incident to the treaty of
1819 and the maps showing the claims of the United States and Spain
at the time seem to show that, for diplomatic reasons probably, the
United States claimed the territory to the Rio Grande. Spain
declared this claim preposterous and fixed the equally absurd ninety-
third degree of longitude as her eastern a^nd our western limit. While
the compromise line was not agreed to as fixing the western limits of
the Louisiana purchase from France by the United States, but rather
as definitely establishing a boundary between Spanish and American
territory west of the Mississippi River, it is perhaps significant that
in its beginning east of the Texas territory in question, and in its
course northwesterly to the forty-second parallel, this boundary
approximated the location of the true Louisiana boundary of La Salle.
It is believed the claim for the Rio Grande limit is untenable, for the
several reasons that the southern Texas country was a later discovery,
and the reasons offered for its union with Louisiana are unconvincing
and insufficient; its area was indefinite and its boundaries unknown;
6 LOUISIANA PURCHASE PROGRESS MAPS.
it was never made a part of La Salle s Louisiana; doubt as to Amer
ican title was strong enough to insure a ready acceptance of the con
tention of Spain as to her ownership of this portion of the Gulf coast
in 1819, and this acceptance was in marked contrast to the vigorous
policy pursued in the Perdido River boundary contention, where
American ownership by virtue of the " purchase" was declared and
maintained by the Government of the United States. On the other
hand, there is room for but one interpretation of the limits of
"Louisiana" as proclaimed by La Salle. It is the line defining the
drainage basin of the Mississippi River on the west, and this line is
therefore adopted as the " Louisiana Purchase" boundary through the
present State of Texas. No available fact warrants the acceptance of
the Spanish-American boundary of 1819, established 16 years after the
purchase of Louisiana, as the boundary of this territory.
It has been held that the Province of Louisiana as proclaimed
by La Salle should be enlarged on the north by the addition of the
territory south of the forty-ninth parallel and west of the head
waters of the Mississippi River;- that is to say, by the drainage basin
of the Red River of the North. It is certain that this territory was
not in La Salle s Louisiana, and it is even doubtful that it ever really
belonged to France. It is universally conceded that the powers
signatory to the treaty of Utrecht in 1713, in the belief that the
headwaters of the Mississippi River were north of the forty-ninth
parallel, intended to confirm France in the possession, not of territory
beyond the Mississippi drainage, but of Mississippi Valley territory
which was proclaimed " Louisiana" by La Salle 31 years before.
But French ownership, even if conceded, by virtue of the treaty of
Utrecht, would be unimportant, for such concession would in no
degree support the contention that the Red River Basin formed a
part of Louisiana. All of the French territory to the north of La
Salle s Louisiana, of whatever extent east or west of the Great Lakes,
was transferred to Great Britain in 1763, and no French claim to any
part of it has appeared since that time.
The origin of American title to the district north and west of
the headwaters of the Mississippi River and south of the forty-ninth
parallel may be found in the treaties between the United States and
Great Britain of 1783 and 1817, the former defining territorial limits
at the close of the Revolutionary War, and the latter fixing the forty-
ninth parallel as the north boundary of the United States between
the Lake of the Woods and the Rocky Mountains. France having
parted with the district affected by these treaties long prior to their
negotiation by the powers interested, was wholly indifferent to the
transfers of the territory made thereby. The drainage basin of
the Red River of the North is therefore excluded from the territory
of Louisiana purchased from France in 1803.
. LOUISIANA PUKCHASE PROGRESS MAPS. 7
Keferring to the extension of the south boundary of the original
Louisiana territory, as shown on the map, appeal is again had to the
proclamation of La Salle, who said, "And also to the mouth of the
river Palms." This river was located with some difficulty. The
first mention of it was found in a large volume belonging to the
records of the Divisions of Private Lands, etc., General Land Office,
entitled "A Complete Historical, Chronological, and Geographical
American Atlas, etc., published by Carey and Lea, Philadelphia,
1822." In the historical data descriptive of Florida was found the
record of a grant in 1526 to Pamphilo de Narvaez from Charles the
Fifth, "of all the lands from Cape Florida to the river Palmos in the
Gulf of Mexico. 7 This river appears upon the map of Florida in
the atlas, but it is not named. Cape Florida is shown upon all
modern maps, as Well as ancient publications, but appeal to maps
published early in the last century was necessary to locate Palm
River. It emptied into Palm Sound, now called Sarasota Bay, and
the southern extremity of Palm Island, wliich was also shown on
the ancient maps, is opposite the mouth of the river. This island
is now called Sarasota Key. This grant of land by Spain, 156 years
before La Salle s voyage down the Mississippi, was peculiar in that
its limits were defined in specific terms. It is here noted merely as
offering a reasonable suggestion for the action of La Salle in choosing
Palm River as the eastern limit of Louisiana on the Gulf coast .
The fact of his choice is unquestioned.
Commercial rights over this original Louisiana, as far as the
Illinois, for a period of 10 years, were granted by Louis XIV to
Antoine de Crozat, September 14, 1712, and the territory itself was
ceded to Spain by treaty of November 3, 1762, the language of the
treaty being, "the whole country known under the name of Louisana,
together with New Orleans and the island on which that city stands."
This was the first transfer relating to the territory of Louisiana.
TERRITORY OF LOUISIANA, 1762-1800 (MAP NO. 2.)
The great but partially temporary shrinkage in area of the ter
ritory of Louisiana, as shown by map No. 2, was caused, not by any
changes in description of the territory ceded to Spain by treaty of
November 3, 1762, but by the failure of France to deliver to Spain
all of the territory described in that treaty, and w T as also due to the
cession to Great Britain, by Spain in 1763, of all of her territory,
undescribed as to boundaries, south of latitude 31 and east of the
Mississippi River.
Four months after the cession by France to Spain of "the whole
territory known under the name of Louisiana," the representatives
of France and Spain and of Great Britain and Portugal met at Paris
and entered into a treaty apparently intended to fix more definitely
8 LOUISIANA PURCHASE PROGEESS MAPS.
the boundaries of their respective possessions in North America.
The attitude of Spain during these negotiations was inexplicable.
At this time she was one of the greatest of the powers, and it would
be idle to assume that her diplomats were unaware of the claim of
France during the previous 80 years to that part of Louisiana
which lay east of the Mississippi River, especially when the commercial
grant of Louis XIV to Crozat with its transfer to the Mississippi
Co., 28 and 32 years before, not only definitely specified this territory,
but also had become a matter of wide-spread knowledge through
the tremendous financial crisis and panic which followed the opera
tions of the later grantee. It can only be assumed that Spanish
reasons of state or the exigencies of diplomacy permitted France
to cede to Great Britain the territory east of the Mississippi and north
of latitude 31, which four months before she had plainly ceded to
Spain. By this same treaty of February- 10, 1763, Spain also ceded
to Great Britain all of her territory east of the Mississippi River and
south of latitude 31, so that when the actual delivery of Louisiana
by France to Spain occurred on April 21, 1764, the territorial bounda
ries were as shown on this map. Spain s title to all of the territory
south of latitude 31 at this time was undoubtedly good; for to her
undisputed title to that part of Florida which was obtained through
discovery and colonization was added the strip of original Louisiana
territory between the Mississippi River and the river Palms, obtained
by the treaty of November 3, 1762. This tract is left uncolored
upon the map, the same as the northern portions of the alienated
Louisiana territory.
TERRITORY OF LOUISIANA, 1800-1803 (MAP No. 3.)
As indicated upon Map No. 3, the boundaries of the territory of
Louisiana west of the Mississippi River suffered no changes between
April 21, 1764, the date of delivery to Spain, and 1800, when the
retrocession from Spain to France by the secret treaty of San Ilde-
fonso occurred. Attention is directed to the colored area of the
map over that part of the original Louisiana as proclaimed by La
Salle, which lies south of latitude 31 and east of the Mississippi
River. Twenty years after the treaty of Paris of February 10, 1763,
in the settlement of boundaries at the close of the Revolutionary
War, the United States took over from Great Britain all that part
of the original Louisiana ceded to the latter by France in 1763, viz,
the territory of Louisiana east of the Mississippi River and north
of latitude 31 N. At this time also, September 3, 1783, owing to
Spanish claims and aggression, Great Britain ceded back to Spain,
without boundary delimitations, the territory south of latitude 31
and east of the Mississippi River, which the former had received, also
LOUISIANA PURCHASE PROGRESS MAPS. 9
without boundary delimitations, through the definitive treaty of
1763. It should be remembered here that that part of this territory
shaded in agreement with the rest of the area called "Louisiana"
formed a part of the original territory of Louisiana proclaimed by
La Salle and ceded by treaty stipulation to Spain in 1762.
The Government and people of the United States, who, in 1783,
came into possession of that part of the original Louisiana ceded by
France to Great Britain, had no reason to question the validity of
the cession of 1763 by France, since Spain had indorsed it and approved
it. James Madison, Secretary of State, in a letter to Robert Liv
ingston, minister to France, of date March 31, 1803, 1 says of this
cession :
Spain might not unfairly be considered as ceding back to France what France had
ceded to her, inasmuch as the cession of it to Great Britain was made for the benefit of
Spain, to whom, on that account, Cuba was restored. The effect was precisely the
same as if France had, in form, made the cession to Spain and Spain had assigned it
over to Great Britain; and the cession may the more aptly be considered as passing
through Spain, as Spain herself was a party to the treaty by which it was conveyed to
Great Britain.
Spain obtained title from France to "the whole of Louisiana" in
1762, and was therefore in position to cede the Gulf coast to Great
Britain in 1763. There was nothing peculiar in the retrocession of
this tract by Great Britain to Spain in 1783; nothing apparent to
justify the contention of Spain, following the retrocession to France
in 1800 of "the colony or province of Louisiana with the same extent
it now has in the hands of Spain, and that it had when France pos
sessed it," that this territory belonged to and formed a part of her
original possessions in Florida.
By secret treaty, known as the "Treaty of San Ildefonso," of
October 1, 1800, Spain retroceded to France "the colony or province
of Louisiana with the same extent it now has in the hands of Spain,
and that it had when France possessed it, and such as it should be
after the treaty subsequently entered into between Spain and the
other states." By this treaty France again came into possession, so
far as Spanish interests were concerned, of the original territory of
Louisiana; but the same was, of course, shorn of the large area east
of the Mississippi Kiver and north of latitude 31, which for 17 years
past had been a part of the United States. This retroceded Louisiana
undoubtedly embraced that portion of the original territory which
lies south of latitude 31 and east of the Mississippi Eiver, whatever
may have been its extent. The wording of the treaty of San Ilde
fonso precludes any other view than that of retrocession, and the
United States so held and understood it, as shown by acts of sover
eignty hereinafter noted.
Vol. 2 of American State Papers, Foreign Relations, p. 577.
10 LOUISIANA PURCHASE PROGRESS MAPS.
TERRITORY OF LOUISIANA, 1803-1819 (MAP No. 4.)
Map No. 4 shows the area of the territory of Louisiana as purchased
from France in 1803. It will be noted that no change in the boundary
of that part west of Mississippi River has occurred since 1762, but
that the area of the tract along the Gulf coast east of the river is
materially reduced.
April 30, 1803, France ceded to the United States the territory of
Louisiana "with the same extent that it now has in the hands of
Spain, and that it had when France possessed it, and such as it
should be after the treaties subsequently entered into between Spain
and other States," using the identical language employed in the
cession to France by Spain in 1800, but adding: "The French
Republic has an incontestible title to the domain and to the posses
sion of said territory." The confinement of American claims, under
the treaty of 1803, to the area west of the Perdido River was doubt
less due to the fact of early Spanish settlement at Pensacola Bay and
at Fort St. Marks, on the Appalachee River, and to the common mis
understanding of the real rights of the United States to all of the
territory south of latitude 31, which formed a part of the original
Louisiana proclaimed by La Salle. The first settlements in this
territory were made by French colonists in 1699, but 17 years after
La Salle s proclamation, and there can be no shadow of doubt that
these settlements were made for the purpose of occupying and exploit
ing the vast domain added to France under the name "Louisiana"
through the courage and energy of the great explorer. The real
meaning and significance of La Salle s claim to the eastern Gulf
coast as far as Palm River seems to have been overlooked, but this
can not be said of that portion between the Perdido River and the
Mississippi River. While Spanish diplomacy was undoubtedly aimed
at retaining this territory at the time of the retrocession to France,
in 1800, notwithstanding the unequivocal wording of the treaty of
San Ildefonso to the contrary, the Government of the United States
refused to accept any such boundary delimitation in 1803.
February 24, 1804, Congress passed an act for laying and collecting
duties in this territory, and on March 26 the district was added to the
new Territory of Orleans. In October, 1810, the President, by procla
mation, directed the governor of Orleans Territory to take possession
of the territory. April 14, 1812, a part of these lands was annexed to
Louisiana territory, and one month later the remainder, lying
between the Pearl and Perdido Rivers, was annexed to the territory
of Mississippi. March 3, 1817, Congress divided this tract, giving
approximately half of it to the Territory of Alabama. Both Missis