[122] This statement is in contradiction with our other sources of information on the subject.
HISTORICAL FRAGMENTS
THE DISPUTED MICHIGAN-WISCONSIN BOUNDARY
Boundary disputes have ever constituted a fruitful source of contention between men and nations. Probably no people has more frequently engaged in them than our own, although, contrary to Old-World precedent, we commonly wage our boundary contentions verbally rather than with arms. Wisconsin, like others of the sisterhood of states, was early in its history a party to a number of boundary disputes, the fruits of victory commonly going, at least in local contemporary judgment, to her opponents. Since Wisconsin has become a state, boundary disputes have until recent years ceased. Two such have, however, arisen within the twentieth century and are still pending, one with the state of Minnesota, the other with that of Michigan. The former is in process of settlement by due governmental procedure, and accordingly no discussion of it would now be useful. The latter is at present in a state of quiescence; yet the boundary paragraphs of the constitutions of Michigan and of Wisconsin contain mutually contradictory clauses with respect to a strip of territory over which Michigan claims and Wisconsin exercises jurisdiction. Moreover, the overtures of our northern neighbor a few years since looking to a determination of the question met on our part with rebuff. Sooner or later, the issue will have to be determined; pending this, an historical résumé of the points at issue may be of some interest, especially to Wisconsin readers.
The boundary between Michigan and Wisconsin was first determined in the act that in 1836 created Wisconsin Territory. In ignorance of the real geography of the region this act described a supposititious line, under the belief that the Montreal River had its source in Lake Vieux Desert. Two years later Congress appropriated $3,000 for the survey of the Michigan-Wisconsin boundary. The appropriation was considered insufficient and no attempt was made to run the line until 1841. Then, the matter having been transferred to the War Department, an army engineer, Lieutenant Thomas J. Cram, was detailed to undertake the survey. Cram spent
the summer of 1841 in Wisconsin’s northern forests, ascertained many facts about the lakes and streams therein, and reported them to the department. Two years later Cram was again detailed to search for the true Wisconsin-Michigan boundary. He spent four months under conditions involving much hardship, in the attempt to determine the line as nearly as possible in accordance with official description. In the report which he made to the head of his department he recommended the abandonment of Lake Vieux Desert as a determinating factor in the interstate boundary line.[123]
The determination of the line rested until 1846, when, in the enabling act providing for the admission of Wisconsin, Congress established the line “to the mouth of the Menominee river; thence up the channel of the said river to the Brulé river; thence up said last mentioned river to Lake Brulé; thence along the southern shore of Lake Brulé in a direct line to the center of the channel between Middle and South Islands, in the Lake of the Desert [Vieux Desert]; thence in a direct line to the head waters of the Montreal river, as marked upon the survey made by Captain Cramm; thence down the main channel of the Montreal river to the middle of Lake Superior.” The constitution of Michigan, adopted in 1850, repeated the boundary article of Wisconsin’s enabling act with only slight verbal changes, including the omission of Captain Cram’s name. The fundamental laws of the two states were thus in accord concerning the line separating these states.
In the meanwhile, in 1847 a portion of the boundary was surveyed by William A. Burt, under the direction of Lucius Lyon.[124] Burt took the contract on April 27 and performed his work during the succeeding summer months. The field notes of his survey do not accompany his printed report, but Lyon stated that Burt’s notes would be forwarded later, and no doubt they are yet preserved in the General Land Office at Washington. From these field notes it might be ascertained why Surveyor Burt chose the eastern branch as the “main channel of the said Montreal river.” In so doing he assigned to Wisconsin 360 square miles of land that now include the towns of
Hurley and Van Buskirk. Had he chosen the western branch, rising in the Island Lake as the Montreal’s headwaters, the jurisdiction of this strip would have rested in Michigan.