Issues 88 and 89 of Volume 22 10/19/02 were devoted to a special essay by Neal McLain on 'Towns and Townships' which are printed below here. From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Oct 19 17:00:34 2002 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id g9JL0YV01274; Sat, 19 Oct 2002 17:00:34 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2002 17:00:34 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200210192100.g9JL0YV01274@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #88 TELECOM Digest Sat, 19 Oct 2002 17:00:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 88 Inside This SPECIAL Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Towns and Townships - Part 1 of 4 - Civil Townships (Neal McLain) Towns and Townships - Part 2 of 4 - Conressional Townships (Neal McLain) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 21:18:33 -0500 From: Neal McLain Reply-To: nmclain@annsgarden.com Organization: Ann's Garden Subject: Towns and Townships - Part 1 of 4 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In the next two issues of the Digest to be distributed over the weekend, I am presenting a special topic of interest on the subject of 'Towns and Townships'; a four part essay written by Neal McLain. The first two parts, on civil and congressional townships appears here. The final two parts will appear in the next issue. McLain begins by quoting some text from the Digest which served as the starting point for his essay. My thanks to Neal for preparing this report. These two special issues will be filed in the Telecom Archives in the /reports area. PAT] . ======================================= . TOWNS AND TOWNSHIPS - PART 1 of 4 . CIVIL TOWNSHIPS . ======================================= Wes Leatherock wrote: > Towns, in the sense used in New England, do not seem > to have any corresponding type of entity in other > parts of the country. Whereupon Mark Roberts wrote: > There are townships in some states (Illinois and > some Missouri counties for instance) ... the farther > west you go, though, the less likely you are to find > governmental townships ... And Wes responded: > There are townships in Oklahoma, but their function > as governmental entities (mostly dealing with road > maintenance, I believe) could be eliminated by a vote > of the people in that township and indeed every one > was eliminated within a relatively short time after > statehood in 1907. > > They remain as townships in the surveyor's sense > (every place surveyed in the standard form customary > in most of the U.S.A. except the very early states > and Texas) have townships six miles on a side, with > names although the more usual designation nowadays > is by range and township (numeric) from the various > initial points. There are "governmental townships" (properly called "civil townships," but often called "towns") in just about every state in the northeast, the Midwest, and the Great Plains. Depending on state policy, their powers vary from non-existent to strong. At one end of the scale, township governments in many Great Plains states have very limited powers, or they may not exist at all; civil townships without functioning governments are said to be "unorganized." At the other end of the scale, township governments in northeastern states and some Midwestern states have functioning local governments with broad powers. In states where civil townships exist, they co-exist with incorporated municipalities (boroughs, cities, or villages). The combination of civil townships and incorporated municipalities forms a continuous web covering the entire state and every county within it (as Kirtley Stanfield pointed out in TD 22:37, you can't be just 'in the county' in these states). There are "townships in the surveyor's sense" (properly called "Congressional townships," but often called "towns") in 30 so- called "Public-land States." These are the states that have been (mostly) surveyed into a more-or-less regular grid by lines at one-mile intervals -- a pattern that stands out clearly from the air today in a regular rectangular pattern of fences, treelines, and roads. They are called "Congressional townships" because they were created pursuant to an act of the United States Congress: the Land Ordinance of 1785. The states of the United States fall into four categories: - STATES WITH CIVIL TOWNSHIPS ONLY. States that have organized civil townships, but do not have Congressional townships, include the New England states, New York, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey. These states were originally colonies located north of the Mason- Dixon Line [1] (the Pennsylvania/Maryland state line), or they were split off from states that were northern colonies. This category also includes Vermont, which was a sovereign nation before it was admitted to the United States. Since these states pre-date the Land Ordinance of 1785, their townships (and counties) are often quite irregular in shape. These townships are generally well-known locally, and their governments have elected governing boards; levy taxes; own and maintain roads, cemeteries, parks, and similar facilities; exercise control over such issues as zoning and building inspection; and hold elections. In three New England states (Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island), county governments don't exist (except as judicial districts), so the town[ship]s are the only local-government subdivisions of the state. Many heavily-urbanized townships provide a full range of municipal services, and are virtually indistinguishable from incorporated cities (e.g. Town of Stoughton, MA; Hamilton Township, NJ; Upper Darby Township, PA). - STATES WITH CONGRESSIONAL TOWNSHIPS ONLY. States that have Congressional townships, but do not have civil townships, include southern and western states from Florida to Arizona, north to Montana and Washington, plus Alaska. In these states, the county (or county-equivalent) government is the only form of local government outside of incorporated municipalities. These are among the 30 Public-land States that were surveyed into Congressional townships, but these townships were never organized as civil townships. The regular rectangular shape of their Congressional townships is reflected in the north-south and east- west orientation of their state and county boundaries. - STATES WITH NO TOWNSHIPS. States that do not have either organized civil townships or Congressional townships include Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, the Carolinas, Georgia, Kentucky, and Tennessee. These states were originally colonies located south of the Mason-Dixon line, or they were split off from states that were southern colonies. This category also includes Delaware, Texas, and Hawaii, which already had existing sub-county land-subdivision systems (but not townships) when they were admitted to the United States. In these states, the county government is the only form of local government outside of incorporated municipalities. Since they pre-date the Land Ordinance of 1785, their counties are often quite irregular in shape. - STATES WITH BOTH TYPES OF TOWNSHIP. States that have both Congressional townships and civil townships include northern and central states throughout the Midwest and the Great Plains, from Ohio to the Dakotas, and south to Oklahoma and Arkansas, plus Nevada and California. These are among the 30 Public-land States that were surveyed into Congressional townships; the regular rectangular shape of the Congressional townships is reflected in the north-south and east-west orientation of their state, county, and township boundaries. At one time or another, many of the Congressional townships were organized as civil townships, although many of them remain unorganized to this day; in some states (notably California), they exist only as Judicial Districts. Many, but by no means all, civil townships are coextensive with Congressional townships. Depending on state policy, the power of the civil townships varies widely. Some states (including Oklahoma, as Wes Leatherock noted [2]) have all but eliminated civil townships (although old township names often still exist for historical, cultural, or sentimental reasons). In other states (notably Michigan and Wisconsin), civil townships have strong local governments that have elected governing boards; levy taxes; own and maintain roads, cemeteries, parks, and similar facilities; exercise control over such issues as zoning and building inspection; and hold elections. Some urbanized townships provide a full range of municipal services, and are all but indistinguishable from incorporated cities (e.g. Clinton Charter Township, MI; Town of Grafton, WI). Why, one might ask, does such a hodgepodge of townships exist? Why do some states have one type of township, but not the other? Why do some have both, while others have neither? In states that have both, are the boundaries the same? Here's my theory, starting with some definitions: . =================== . === DEFINITIONS === . =================== The following definitions apply only within the fifty states of the United States, plus the District of Columbia. They are based on web research, personal experience (mostly in the cable television industry, where I dealt with franchising issues in several states), and a big pile of books and atlases. I believe these definitions are correct as far as they go, but they're probably not as inclusive as they could be. Suggestions and clarifications are welcome, either by personal e-mail (nmclain@annsgarden.com) or by posting to the list. BOROUGH: - In some New England states, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, an incorporated municipality identified as a "borough" under state law. - In New York, one of five former counties that have been incorporated into the City of New York: Bronx County (Bronx Borough) Kings County (Brooklyn Borough) New York County (Manhattan Borough) Queens County (Queens Borough) Richmond County (Richmond Borough) Richmond County is coextensive with, and commonly known as, Staten Island. - In Alaska, the primary civil subdivision, equivalent to a county, in the portions of the state where organized boroughs have been established. But much of Alaska is outside of any organized borough: "Areas of the state that are not within the boundaries of an organized borough constitute a single unorganized borough." [3] CITY. In all states, an incorporated municipality identified as a "city" under state law. Most cities are located inside of counties (or county-equivalents); however, some are "independent cities" (see INDEPENDENT CITY). COUNTY. The primary civil subdivision in 48 of the 50 states. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, this definition applies even in the three states (Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island) where county government has been abolished. [4] See PRIMARY CIVIL SUBDIVISION. INDEPENDENT CITY. A city that lies outside of any county. The following are independent cities: - Alaska: any city lying outside of an organized borough (e.g. City of Nome), or a "Unified Municipality" (see MUNICIPALITY, UNIFIED). [5] - California: San Francisco (incorporated as "City and County of San Francisco"). [6] - Colorado: Denver (incorporated as "City and County of Denver"). [7] - District of Columbia: Washington ("The government of the District of Columbia holds a unique status in the country's political system, functioning as a state, county, and city.") [8] - Hawaii: Honolulu (incorporated as "City and County of Honolulu"; coextensive with, and often known as, [the island of] Oahu). [9] - Maryland: Baltimore (incorporated as "City of Baltimore"). [10] - Missouri: St. Louis (incorporated as "City of St. Louis"). [11] - Nevada: Carson City (incorporated as "Municipality of Carson City", but often referred to as "Carson City County"). [12] - Virginia: most large cities (e.g. City of Fairfax; City of Richmond). But this term does not include Charles City County or James City County which are counties, not cities. [13] Several states also have "consolidated city-counties" which combine some (or all) municipal and county functions under a single government (e.g. Athens City/Clark County, Georgia; Indianapolis City/Marion County, Indiana; New Orleans City/Orleans Parish, Louisiana). [14, 15] The distinction between "independent city" and "consolidated city-county" seems to be rather fuzzy. MINOR CIVIL SUBDIVISION. In all states, the locally-recognized political subdivisions of the Primary Civil Subdivisions: - Civil Townships, organized or not. - Incorporated municipalities. - Government reservations (state and national parks and forests, military installations, correctional institutions, and similar reservations). These entities typically provide their own administrative bureaucracies, law enforcement, fire protection, and utility services within their boundaries. They are administratively independent of the governments of any county, township, or municipality in which they might be located. - American Indian Reservations (including American Indian trust lands and Alaska Native Regional Corporations). [4] - Certain privately-owned entities that provide (or contract for) their own administrative bureaucracies, law enforcement, fire protection, and utility services within their boundaries (e.g., Walt Disney World Resort Complex, in Orange and Osceola Counties Florida: under its agreements with the State of Florida and the Reedy Creek Improvement District, it's a virtual fiefdom within its boundaries). [16] - Other county subdivisions that go by a variety of names that vary from state to state according to state policy, local policy, or tradition: ahupuaas, beats, barrios, civil districts, districts, election precincts, gores, grants, judicial districts, judicial townships, hundreds, islands, magisterial districts, militia districts, plantations, precincts, points, police districts, police-jury wards, public corporations, purchases, supervisorial districts, tracts, and wards. The U.S. Geological Survey has published a state-by-state list of "local subdivisions" that it deems sufficiently important to show on topographic maps (or to explain why they're not shown). I have posted a copy of this list at . [17] MUNICIPALITY, INCORPORATED. In all states, a generic term for an urbanized community having a legal charter (or similar document) from its respective state government. Municipalities have defined boundaries that can be changed by actions of their governing boards. Municipalities are legal corporations: they have elected local governments, the right to levy and collect taxes, the right to collect and disburse funds; and such other rights as are specified in state law. Depending on state policy, incorporated municipalities may be called boroughs, cities, city corporations, municipalities, towns, or villages. In point: - Borough of Princeton, NJ - City of Philadelphia, PA - Ogden City Corporation, UT - Municipality of Carson City, NV - Town of Leesburg, VA - Village of Deerfield, IL MUNICIPALITY, UNIFIED. In Alaska, a municipality incorporated as a consolidated city-borough government. [5] The Unified Municipalities are: - Anchorage (incorporated as "Municipality of Anchorage") - Juneau (incorporated as "City and Borough of Juneau") - Sitka (incorporated as "City and Borough of Sitka") MUNICIPALITY, UNINCORPORATED. A community that has not established its own local government, but has remained part of a larger administrative unit, typically a civil township or a county. Depending on state policy and local tradition, unincorporated municipalities are known by a variety of names: rural community, rural locality, rural town, rural village, small town, town, unincorporated community, unincorporated place, unincorporated town, unincorporated village, village, or just plain unincorporated. Unincorporated municipalities do not have defined boundaries or local governments, but they usually have locally-recognized names. They can be quite small: even a crossroads with a gas station and a couple of houses is an unincorporated if it has a name. My favorite example of a small unincorporated is Ladoga, Wisconsin: as you drive into Ladoga, you pass the "STOP SIGN AHEAD" sign before you get to the "LADOGA UNINCORPORATED" sign. PRIMARY CIVIL SUBDIVISION. The primary political subdivision of a state below the state government: - Borough in Alaska. - Parish in Louisiana. - Former county in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island. - County in all other states. TOWN: - In states that have civil townships, an abbreviated word for civil township. But in New York and most New England states, civil townships have been called "towns" for so long (since Colonial days) that the two words are essentially interchangeable. - In the 30 Public-land States, an abbreviated word for Congressional township. But its use in land descriptions (as in "Town 6 North") is so prevalent that the two words are essentially interchangeable. - In states that have don't have civil townships (and may or may not have Congressional townships), an incorporated municipality identified as a "town" under state law (e.g., Town of Bel Air, MD; Town of Oakland, FL; Town of Troy, TN). - In vernacular English, any small urbanized community without regard to its legal status, size, population, or physical boundaries -- except, perhaps, "larger than a village, but smaller than city." The architect Eliel Saarinen formalizes this idea: "... men gathered together, they lived in close contact, they formed camps, hamlets, and villages; when greater numbers gathered, villages expanded into towns, towns into cities, and cities into those extremely concentrated great metropolises of the preset era." [18] VILLAGE. An incorporated municipality identified as a "village" under state law. In popular culture, villages are usually thought of as small communities (certainly smaller than cities), but this distinction is largely cultural rather than legal. In Illinois, many large Chicago suburbs are incorporated as villages: Village of Skokie; Village of Hinsdale; Village of Oak Park. In terms of population, the Village of Niles, Illinois is larger than the City of Niles, Michigan. [19] . ================================== . === ORIGINS OF CIVIL TOWNSHIPS === . ================================== I believe (although I can't prove) that the concept of the civil township, as a unit of local government, can be traced all the way back to England. Townships (also known variously as "towns," "liberties," "hamlets," or "hundreds") existed in England during the Colonial period. At least one other writer agrees with this theory. George Walter Goodley, in his history of Bethel Township, Pennsylvania, writes: "In England, from whence [William] Penn surely took his pattern for local government, there were counties and sub-divisions of counties (or shires) known as Liberties, or Hamlets, or Towns, or Townships. And so the earliest subdivisions of Counties in Pennsylvania were called Liberties or Hamlets. These were the titles attached to Bethel, Concord and other townships of Chester County, at their beginning." [20] Following this pattern, the northern colonies (except Delaware) established dual-level local governments: counties and organized civil townships. In New England and in New York, the townships were called "towns"; in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, they were called "townships." These towns and townships still exist today, and they still have functioning governments. Most of the southern colonies did not follow this pattern: they established counties, but not civil townships. The exceptions: - The Carolinas established counties with civil townships. - Delaware and Virginia (and perhaps others) established counties with township-like entities called "hundreds." The townships and the hundreds no longer exist today, although their historic boundaries are still shown on some maps. In these states today, the counties and incorporated municipalities are the only form of local government. This division between the policies of the northern colonies and those of the southern colonies is vividly illustrated by the example of two adjacent counties separated by the Mason-Dixon Line: York County Pennsylvania and Harford County Maryland. - Like most Pennsylvania counties, York County is subdivided into townships that were settled and named over two centuries ago. One can deduce much about the county's history by noting the names of its townships, and the municipalities that grew from them. On one side of the county, we find townships named Lancaster, Manchester, Shrewsbury, and Windsor, and the City of York. On the other side, we find the Townships of Heidelberg and Manheim, and the Borough of Hanover. Anyone familiar with the geography of Europe will surely recognize the nationalities of the immigrants who originally settled these townships -- even if they misspelled Mannheim. - Just across the state line south of York County, we find Harford County, Maryland. Like all counties in the southern colonies, Harford County has no townships; local administration rests with the county government. For administrative convenience, the county is subdivided into six districts, but the names of these districts don't tell us much about the county's history: they're called A, B, C, D, E, and F. Why do these differences exist? I've pondered this question for years, and I've never been able to answer it to my own satisfaction. Donald Miller, the host of the PBS television series, "A Biography of America," [21] notes the differences between the northern and the southern colonies in Program 2. He describes "two profoundly different colonies, Virginia and Massachusetts Bay," noting their "vastly different civilizations," "almost as different from one another as they were from England." So perhaps the differences in local-government structures is just another manifestation of the differences between those two "vastly different civilizations." A transcript of Program 2 of "A Biography of America" is posted at . . ======================================= . === OB-TELECOM: CABLE TV FRANCHISES === . ======================================= These differences in local-government policy have had some interesting consequences for the cable television industry. Cable franchises are issued and regulated at the local level, which, in many northern states, means township governments. One consequence of this situation is that cable systems in northern states often have to negotiate more franchise agreements than systems in southern states: - A cable company in a southern state can serve an entire county with just a few franchises: one for each municipality plus one for the county. - A cable company in some northern states has to get a separate franchise with each municipality, plus a separate franchise with each township. Although this situation doesn't directly affect franchise fees (which are based on subscribership), it certainly drives up administrative costs: more money in lawyers' fees; more meetings to attend; more office hassle just keeping track of which subscribers live in which jurisdiction. Further adding to costs, some franchise agreements require separate public-, government-, and/or educational-access channels. I've seen headend buildings feeding dozens of separate trunk cables, each cable heading off in a different direction to some distant community carrying the same set of signals as all the other cables except for one or two access channels. Another fairly common consequence: adjacent townships sometimes award franchises to different cable companies. More office hassle ("I'm sorry sir, but that address is in _______ township. That area is served by ______ cable company ... please call them at _______." And more confusion for the technicians, especially when there are two CATV cables on the same pole ("Be sure you connect that house to the red tap, not the blue one!"). All that said, I also have to note that some of my experiences with local governments have been fascinating. I've seen some pretty palatial "town halls" with marble corridors, wood-paneled council chambers, and uniformed guards in the lobby. I've also seen town halls that were old frame buildings with just a few rooms. One two-room shack in a certain northern-Wisconsin township didn't even have restrooms; just a couple portapotties out back. And the meeting I'll never forget. Being Item #2 on the agenda, we had to wait while the board discussed Item #1: a lengthy analysis of the pros and cons of renewing the agreement with the high-school kid that mows the grass in the town cemetery. --------- In Part 2 of this essay, I'll discuss the Congressional Townships in more detail. Posted by Neal McLain nmclain@annsgarden.com Copyright (c) 2002 by Neal McLain ------------------------------------------------- References: [1] John Cletheroe. John Cletheroe's USA and Canada Holiday Hints: The Mason-Dixon Line. . [2] Oklahoma Constitution, Section V-5a, 1913. . [3] Alaska Statutes, Section 29.03.010. . [4] United States Census Bureau, Participant Statistical Areas Program. Census 2000 Statistical Areas Boundary Criteria. . [5] Alaska State Legislature's Majority Coalition Web Site, Structures of Local Government in Alaska, p. 2. . [6] Official website for the City and County of San Francisco. . [7] The official site of the City and County of Denver. . [8] District of Columbia, City Government website. . [9] This Is Your City and County of Honolulu Government. . [10] Baltimore City Municipal Departments & Offices. . [11] Official Web Site of the City of St. Louis. . [12] Carson City, Nevada Online. . [13] Charles City County and James City County are the oldest organized counties in the United States. The first permanent settlement by English colonists anywhere in North America was Jamestown, settled in 1607, and located in what is now James City County. Jamestown is also the site of the earliest extant land patent, dated February 1619, confirming that Georg Yeardley, Governor of the Colony, deeded 200 acres of land to William Fairefax, "Yeoman of James Citty ... an ancient planter who hath remained 8 years in the country & performed all services to the Colony that might in any way belong to his charge." Nell Marion Nugent, ed. Cavaliers and Pioneers: Abstracts of Virginia Land Patents and Grants, 1623-1800. Richmond: Virginia Land Office, 1934, p. 109. [14] Welcome to the Indianapolis - Marion County Code of Ordinances. . [15] Two more consolidated city/county governments born. Washington: National Association of Counties, 1996. . [16] About Reedy Creek Improvement District. . [17] Morris M. Thompson. Maps for America, Third Edition. Washington: United States Department of the Interior, 1988, p 75- 77, uncopyrighted. [18] Eliel Saarinen. The City: Its growth, Its Decay, Its Future. Cambridge: The M.I.T. Press, 1943, p 175. [19] Road Atlas: United States - Canada - Mexico. Rand McNally & Company, 2000. [20] George Walter Goodley. Bethel Township, Delaware County, Pennsylvania, Thru Three Centuries: A historical account of an early Pennsylvania Community. Boothwyn, Pennsylvania: Bethel Township Historical Society, 1987. Reproduced by permission of the publisher, Reece Thomas. . [21] Donald L. Miller, John Henry MacCracken Professor of History at Lafayette College, Easton, Pennsylvania. A Biography of America, Program 2. Boston: WGBH Educational Foundation, 2000. . ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 21:18:45 -0500 From: Neal McLain Reply-To: nmclain@annsgarden.com Organization: Ann's Garden Subject: Towns and Townships - Part 2 of 4 . ======================================= . TOWNS AND TOWNSHIPS - PART 2 of 4 . CONGRESSIONAL TOWNSHIPS . ======================================= In Part 1 of this essay, I discussed Civil Townships, with a few brief references to Congressional townships. In this part, I will describe Congressional townships in more detail. Under the terms of The Paris Peace Treaty of 1783 (which officially ended the Revolutionary War), Great Britain ceded the Northwest Territory to the United States. [22] The Northwest Territory is the area between the Ohio and the Mississippi Rivers; we know it today as the states of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, and part of Minnesota. After this treaty took effect, things stood more or less as follows: - The United States Government (specifically, the Second Continental Congress operating under the authority of the Articles of Confederation [23]) controlled most of the Northwest Territory. Three states (Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Virginia) claimed parts of the Northwest Territory under old grants made by various English kings during the Colonial period (Connecticut's grant extended its boundaries all the way to the Pacific Ocean!). But by 1800, these states had ceded most of their old claims to the Congress. - The boundaries of the original 13 states were pretty much the same as they are today, except that Massachusetts included what is now Maine, and Virginia included what is now West Virginia. [24, 25] - Virginia claimed land outside its boundaries extending west all the way to the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers, including what is now Kentucky. [25] - Virginia also claimed an area in what is now south- central Ohio as the "Virginia Military District" for the purpose of providing "land bounty warrants" to soldiers who had fought in the Revolutionary War. [26] - Connecticut claimed an area in what is now northeastern Ohio as its "Western Reserve," based on a grant that King Charles II had made back in 1662. This area of Ohio is still known as the Western Reserve, a name that lives on today in the name of Case Western Reserve University. [27] - Vermont was an independent republic. [28] - North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia all claimed lands extending west to the Mississippi River, including what is now Tennessee and parts of Alabama and Mississippi. [25] - Spain controlled Florida, including an extension of the panhandle that extended to the Mississippi River and included what is now parts of Alabama and Mississippi. [25] - France and Spain claimed everything west of the Mississippi River. - Squatters had staked claims in many parts of what is now Kentucky, Tennessee, and Ohio. - Native Indians claimed various parcels of land throughout the entire United States. In the years following the Paris Peace Treaty, new states were admitted to the United States. The patterns of local government that had been established during the Colonial Period were extended into the new states: - Maine retained the dual-level structure it had had when it was part of Massachusetts. - Vermont retained the dual-level structure it had had as a sovereign nation (and before that, as part of New York). - Kentucky and West Virginia retained the county-only structures they had had when they were part of Virginia. - Tennessee retained the county-only structure it had had when it was part of North Carolina. And the Land Ordinance of 1785 extended (or tried to extend) the dual-level pattern of the northern colonies to the new territories added thereafter. . ================================== . === TWO FUNDAMENTAL ORDINANCES === . ================================== Notwithstanding the claims of Connecticut, Virginia, the squatters, and the Indians, the Second Continental Congress was determined to control the development of the Northwest Territory. The Congress had many reasons for wanting to control its development. It wanted to ensure that the United States -- not England, France, Spain, or some independent government -- would enjoy the benefits of the westward expansion. It saw the sale of western lands as a source of revenue. And, perhaps most importantly, it wanted to ensure that the democratic form of government -- for which it had just fought a long and bloody war - - would be extended into new territories. To implement its strategy, the Congress enacted two ordinances that stand to this day as the fundamental documents governing the westward expansion of the United States: - The LAND ORDINANCE OF 1785 ("An Ordinance for ascertaining the mode of disposing of Lands in the Western Territory"). This act dealt with the practical issue of how to subdivide almost 250,000 square miles of uncharted land into salable parcels. It specified the procedure for qualifying surveyors, and the point at which the surveys were to begin ("on the River Ohio, north from the western termination of a line, which has been run as the southern boundary of the State of Pennsylvania..."). Most significantly, it specified the procedure for subdividing the land: "The Surveyors...shall proceed to divide the said territory into townships of six miles square, by lines running due north and south, and others crossing these at right angles, as near as may be, unless where the boundaries of the late Indian purchases may render the same impracticable." [29] - The NORTHWEST ORDINANCE OF 1787 ("An ordinance for the government of the Territory of the United States northwest of the River Ohio"). This act dealt with political issues: it specified how new territories were to be created and governed, and it guaranteed that new territories would be admitted as states on an equal footing with the original thirteen states. It also established guarantees designed to encourage settlement in the new territories: assured civil liberties, trial by jury, secure land titles, religious freedom, local self- governance, and the prohibition of slavery. [30] Note the following words from the Land Ordinance: "...townships of six miles square, by lines running due north and south, and others crossing these at right angles..." These units are called "Congressional Townships" because they were created by an act of the Congress. Why did the Second Continental Congress want to establish townships in the new territories? Unlike our present-day Congress, the Continental Congress didn't publish "legislative histories," so there's no way to know for certain. But a few facts seem obvious. First of all, the members of the Congress faced the problem of surveying and selling land that they had never seen. Indeed, except for a few explorers and fur traders, few United States citizens had ever visited the Northwest Territory. The Congress adopted a straightforward solution to this problem: a grid of lines oriented north-south and east-west, spaced at one-mile intervals. The second problem was political: the Congress wanted to create a structure that would encourage local residents to form territorial and local governments. But they had to do it with the tools at hand: by ordinance, and by whatever procedures they could build into the land-surveying process. The Northwest Ordinance would be the vehicle for encouraging the creation of territories and states, but they still needed a way to encourage local government. Congress' solution to this problem is found in the Land Ordinance: "townships of six miles square." Thus, the concept of the civil township, as a unit of local government, was embodied in the land- surveying process itself. Once the land was settled, it was hoped, the residents of each township would form a township government. Of course, until the local residents actually did so, these "townships" weren't townships at all; they were just lines drawn on a map. It's a long way from a Congressional township to a civil township. For a civil township to exist, the local residents have to organize one: they have to get together, petition the county (if one exists) for approval, petition the state (or territorial) government for a charter, hold elections, enact ordinances, and become a functioning entity. Nevertheless, the vision of the Second Continental Congress seems clear. If it couldn't pre-ordain the westward expansion, it did the best it could: in the process of creating a structure for surveying the western lands into salable parcels, it also created a structure that would encourage local residents to form local governments. Why "six miles square"? Why did the Congress decide that Congressional townships should be "six miles square," containing 36 square miles? Again, we'll never know the definitive answer, but we can make a reasonable guess. The Congress certainly must have taken a cue from the existing civil townships in the northern colonies. These governmental units were relatively small, typically ten to fifty square miles. These small units undoubtedly facilitated direct citizen participation in such local issues such as public assistance, law enforcement, fire protection, and the maintenance of roads, bridges, and cemeteries. [31] Townships were also responsible for holding elections. A classic question -- "How far can you go to vote on a horse?" -- aptly illustrates the advantage of small governmental units. The survey plan created by the Land Ordinance of 1785 came to be known as the United States Public Lands Survey (USPLS), and formed the blueprint for further westward expansion. I will discuss the USPLS in detail in Part 3 of this essay. Posted by Neal McLain nmclain@annsgarden.com Copyright (c) 2002 by Neal McLain ------------------------------------------------- References: [22] The Paris Peace Treaty of 1783. . [23] The Articles of Confederation. . [24] For a fascinating account of how West Virginia extricated itself from Virginia, see Brenda's Wild Wonderful West Virginia Webpage at . [25] A map of the United States, as things stood after the Paris Peace Treaty (and showing subsequent cessions by individual states to the United States Government), is posted at . [26] Thomas Aquinas Burke. Ohio Lands - A Short History, Eighth Edition. Virginia Military District. Columbus: Ohio Auditor of State, 1996, p. 4-7. Burke notes that the amount of land granted by land bounty varied from 100 to 15,000 acres, depending on a soldier's rank and length of service. General George Washington was eligible for over 23,000 acres, but he never exercised his rights to this land. [27] Burke, Op Cite, p. 8-10. [28] Vermont, The Green Mountain State: Some Vermont History. . [29] The Land Ordinance of 1785. . [30] The Northwest Ordinance of 1787. . [31] George Walter Goodley, in his history of Bethel Township, Pennsylvania, notes a situation that could certainly be called public assistance: "[by] the order of 'the court held 11th no 6, 1684' directing that 'ye inhabitants of Concord, Bethell and Chichester doe meet on the 3rd day of next weeke att Henry Reynolds to conferre together to provide a maintenance for Miriam Thompson and her child.'" Bethel Township, Delaware County, Pennsylvania, Thru Three Centuries: A historical account of an early Pennsylvania Community. Boothwyn, Pennsylvania: Bethel Township Historical Society, 1987. Reproduced by permission of the publisher, Reece Thomas. . ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V22 #88 ***************************** TELECOM Digest Sat, 19 Oct 2002 18:00:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 89 Inside This SPECIAL Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Towns and Townships - Part 3 of 4 - US Public Lands Survey (Neal McLain) Towns and Townships - Part 4 of 4 - Legacy of USPLS (Neal McLain) Towns and Townships - Conclusion (TELECOM Digest Editor) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 21:18:53 -0500 From: Neal McLain Reply-To: nmclain@annsgarden.com Organization: Ann's Garden Subject: Towns and Townships - Part 3 of 4 . ============================================= . TOWNS AND TOWNSHIPS - PART 3 of 4 . THE UNITED STATES PUBLIC LANDS SURVEY . ============================================= In Part 2 of this essay, I discussed the origin of Congressional Townships, with a few references to the United States Public Lands Survey (USPLS). In this part, I will describe the USPLS in more detail. The survey plan created by the Land Ordinance of 1785 came to be known as the United States Public Lands Survey (USPLS), and formed the blueprint for further westward expansion. The United States Congress reenacted the law in 1796, and it was used for the subdivision of Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, the Louisiana Purchase, and for most new territories acquired thereafter. Congressional townships now cover about 72% of the country. [32] The principal exceptions are: - The original thirteen states: Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, and Virginia. These states had been settled, and largely surveyed, before the Second Continental Congress even existed. - The four states that were geographically part of the original thirteen, but that were subsequently admitted as separate states: Kentucky, Maine, Tennessee, and West Virginia. - The District of Columbia, originally part of Maryland. - The three formerly-sovereign nations: Hawaii, Texas, and Vermont. These states had already been partially settled and surveyed before being admitted to the United States. After admission, Texas continued its surveys using a rectangular grid similar to the USPLS grid, giving northwest Texas a checkerboard appearance similar to Public-land states. - Much of Alaska. Alaska is one of the 30 public-land states; much of it has been surveyed, and some surveys continue to this day. But much of the state has been set aside as wilderness reserve and may never be surveyed. - Connecticut's Western Reserve and the Virginia Military District, now both part of Ohio. - Innumerable smaller parcels within the 30 Public-land States that had been surveyed before the USPLS surveys began. The actual surveys were made by contract surveyors operating under the supervision of the Treasury Department's General Land Office (GLO), an organization immortalized in the phrase "Land Office business." From all accounts, the survey teams had a difficult time of it: since the very purpose of the USPLS was to survey the land for potential sale, the surveys were conducted before the land was cleared. Tools were primitive: measurements were made with a 66- foot steel chain (one can imagine the difficulty of running a steel chain along the ground in dense underbrush). Service vehicles were horses or burros, housing was an impromptu campsite, and the food supply was live-off-the-land. Hostile Indians, disease, dangerous animals, and bad weather undoubtedly made things even worse. Yet in spite of it all, the surveys were completed, and the maps were duly filed with the GLO. Most arable farmland eventually passed into private ownership, either through sale, or later, under the Homestead Act of 1862 and the Dawes Act of 1887, by outright grant. Further information about the history of the USPLS may be found at a website provided by Dr. Donald J. Huebner of the Department of Geography at The University of Texas at Austin: . . ============================ . === THE RECTANGULAR GRID === . ============================ A Congressional township is a square parcel of land measuring six miles (more or less) on each side. Congressional townships are identified by a numbering system referenced to two lines: a "base line" and a "principal meridian." The intersection of the base line and the principal meridian is called the "initial point" or the "point of beginning" (POB). There are many base lines and principal meridians in the United States; a map is posted at . [33] Each survey was begun by establishing the base line and the principal meridian. Some sort of monument (a wood stake, a pit, a pile of rocks) was placed at the point of beginning, and all surveys were referenced to that point. Cardinal directions and latitude were established using conventional nautical instruments such as the compass and the sextant. [34] Distances were measured with a Gunter's Chain, a steel chain 66 feet long consisting of 100 links, each 7.92 inches long. To measure a mile, the survey team would lay out a distance of 80 chains. [35] Each Congressional township is identified by two numbers: a "town number" north or south of the base line, and a "range number" east or west of the principal meridian. Example: Town 6 North Range 9 East identifies a township six townships north, and nine ranges east, of the POB. Taking Wes Leatherock's mention of Oklahoma as an example, following are the reference lines for most of Oklahoma (everything except the panhandle): - The base line is the "Indian Base Line." Several county lines fall on the base line; e.g. the line between Murray County and Carter County. In Stephens County, the base line is the centerline of Base Line Road. - The principal meridian is the "Indian Meridian." In Garvin County, the principal meridian is the centerline of Meridian Road. - The Point of Beginning is on the county line about halfway between Hennipen and Davis, and one mile south of Hoover. A copy of the USGS 7.5-minute map for this area is posted at . [36] The POB is near the center of the map, indicated by a small triangle. It's at 1042 feet AMSL, and the point is marked on the ground by a benchmark ("BM"). You can also find this point in the southeast corner of Page 52 of the Oklahoma DeLorme Atlas. [37] There are similar situations (complete with roads named "Base Line Road" and "Meridian Road") scattered all over the country. Each Congressional township contains 36 parcels called "sections." Sections are numbered as follows: ------------------------------- | 6 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | ------------------------------- | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | ------------------------------- | 18 | 17 | 16 | 15 | 14 | 13 | ------------------------------- | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | ------------------------------- | 30 | 29 | 28 | 27 | 26 | 25 | ------------------------------- | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | ------------------------------- Each section contains one square mile, or 640 acres: ----------------------------- | | | | | | | | | | | One Section | | One Square Mile | | 27,878,400 Square Feet | | 6400 Square Chains | | 640 Acres | | | | | | | | | | | ----------------------------- Each section can be subdivided into four 160-acre "quarter sections" by "quarter-section lines" (sometimes called "quarter lines"): ----------------------------- | | | | | | | NW 1/4 | NE 1/4 | | 1/4 Sq Mile | 1/4 Sq Mile | | 160 Acres | 160 Acres | | | | | | | |-------------|-------------| | | | | | | | SW 1/4 | SE 1/4 | | 1/4 Sq Mile | 1/4 Sq Mile | | 160 Acres | 160 Acres | | | | | | | ----------------------------- Each quarter section can be further subdivided into four 40-acre "quarter quarter sections" by "quarter-quarter-section lines," also known as "forty lines": ----------------------------- |NW 1/4|NE 1/4| | |NW 1/4|NW 1/4| | | 40 a.| 40 a.| NE 1/4 | |------|------| 160 a. | |SW 1/4|SE 1/4| | |NW 1/4|NW 1/4| | | 40 a.| 40 a.| | |-------------|-------------| | | | N 1/2 | | | | SE 1/4 | | W 1/2| E 1/2| 80 a. | |SW 1/4|SW 1/4|-------------| | 80 a.| 80 a.| S 1/2 | | | | SE 1/4 | | | | 80 a. | ----------------------------- When the General Land Office began selling land, it sold it in 40- acre parcels. Farm land has been bought and sold in 40-acre parcels ever since, and the word "forty," used as a noun (as in "the back forty"), has long been part of the vernacular language of rural America. Every 40-acre parcel in any of the 30 Public-land States can be uniquely described by seven parameters: Quarter-quarter section Quarter section Section number Town[ship] number Base Line Range number Principal Meridian Example: "The Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 10, Town 6 South of the Indian Base Line, Range 4 East of the Indian Meridian." In modern surveying and tax records, USPLS land descriptions are usually abbreviated. The names of the base line the principal meridian are often omitted (since they're understood by default in most surveying and tax situations), and what's left is abbreviated. Typical abbreviations include: NE 1/4 NW 1/4 Sec 10 T6S R4E NEQ NWQ 10 T6S R4E NE-NW-10-6S-4E Theoretically, this numbering system produces a regular grid of square townships, each containing 36 square sections, extending across an entire state or territory. In fact, there are many discontinuities in the grid. Two factors account for this: - The earth is a sphere; consequently, meridians get closer together as one moves north. - The original surveys contained numerous errors resulting from such factors as primitive equipment, difficult working conditions, poorly-trained personnel, and shifts in local magnetic declination. An extreme case in point: , a portion of El Dorado County, Colorado. In an attempt to correct for these errors, the original surveyors reestablished new reference lines at intervals of about four townships. These new reference lines stand out clearly on modern maps as abrupt shifts in the regular grid pattern. They also account for some of weird jogs in many country roads. . ========================= . === PARTIAL TOWNSHIPS === . ========================= The ideal rectangular grid described above didn't always work for another reason: many things interrupted the grid, such as lakes, rivers, mountains, deserts, existing survey lines, and Indian treaty boundaries. The GLO provided the surveyors with specific rules about handling these situations, but the actual field work didn't always comply with the rules. The actual results were generally something like this: - In the case of relatively narrow waterways (creeks, small lakes), the survey lines were carried across and continued without interruption on the other side. - In the case of large waterways (generally, any river wider than three chains) survey lines were run to the edge (the high water mark, but in some cases at the edge of a bank above the floodplain), and a "meander corner" marker was set. The survey might have been continued on the other side at a later date, or it might have been conducted by a different surveyor at a different time, and it might have been referenced to a different POB. In any case, no attempt was made to line up the survey lines on the two sides. - In the case of mountains and deserts, the survey was supposed to continue across without interruption. The surveyors presumably did their best, but the evidence of modern USGS maps sometimes casts doubt on their diligence. In some cases, section lines are shown as dashed red lines on USGS topo maps, indicating "location doubtful." In the Wasatch Mountains east of Odgen, Utah, even the principal meridian (Salt Lake Meridian) is shown as a dashed red line on a 1969 topo map. - In the case of an existing survey line or treaty line, the new survey lines are supposed to "close" against the existing line: the surveyor was supposed to establish the point where the new survey line meets the existing line, and erect a monument at the point, but not encroach beyond the existing line. All of the above situations were (or should have been) described in the field notes. Situations like these resulted in a lot of odd parcels: incomplete sections and incomplete Congressional townships. But as long as the situations were accurately described in the field notes and on subsequent maps, these parcels could still be sold by the GLO. Of course, problems arose if the surveyors didn't close to existing survey lines, but overran them (the surveyors were supposed to know about existing survey lines, but apparently some of them weren't as diligent as they should have been). A case in point: before the surveys began, a federal reservation had been established in what is now Pipestone County, Minnesota to protect catlinite quarries used by native Indians. [38] The USPLS surveyors should have been aware of the reservation, but apparently they weren't: they ignored it and ran the USPLS grid right across it. By the time the problem was discovered, a railroad had been built across the reservation (presumably because the railroad's surveyors had relied on the USPLS maps). The area is now Pipestone National Monument, [39] but the railroad is still there. I've posted several examples of the USPLS grid in various situations at . . ======================== . === CORNER MONUMENTS === . ======================== The original surveyors marked every section corner with some sort of marker, and recorded its position in a set of field notes. Most of the original markers have long since disappeared, and much effort has been expended recovering "obliterated corners" or "lost corners." [40] Once recovered, obliterated/lost corners have been marked with permanent monuments, such as concrete monuments, steel stakes, or aluminum monuments designed for the purpose. Images of typical monuments are posted at . The physical location of a monumented corner is inviolate. Although the latitude and longitude of a corner may change with every advance in technology, the actual physical location of a corner on the ground never moves, If the land itself moves (because of an earthquake or the motion of the underlying tectonic plate), the corner moves with it, but its relationship to the surrounding land remains intact. In the 30 Public-land States, USPLS land descriptions stand today as the underlying reference grid for all other land descriptions. Every recorded plat and every certified survey must be tied to a monumented USPLS corner. . ==================== . === LAND PATENTS === . ==================== When the General Land Office sold land, it issued "patents" to identify the land. Most of the original patents are now in the custody of the Bureau of Land Management; those issued between 1820 and 1908 are available online at . A typical patent (my great-great-great grandfather's farm in Raisin Township, Lenawee County, Michigan) is posted at . --------- In Part 4 of this essay, I'll discuss the legacy of the United States Public Lands Survey. Posted by Neal McLain nmclain@annsgarden.com Copyright (c) 2002 by Neal McLain ------------------------------------------------- References: [32] Russell Brinker et al. Elementary Surveying, Sixth Edition. (New York: Harper & Row, 1977), p. 401. [33] Morris M. Thompson. Maps for America, Third Edition (Washington: United States Department of the Interior, 1988), p 82-83, uncopyrighted. [34] Cognitive Technologies Corporation. The Trigonometry Explorer--On-Line. Sextant. . [35] United States Corps of Engineers, Topographical Engineer Detachment, Company B. The Gunters (Surveyors) Chain. . [36] United States Geological Survey. Topographic Map, 7.5- minute series. [37] Oklahoma Atlas & Gazetteer, First Edition. Yarmouth, Maine: DeLorme, 19989. [38] Catlinite, also known as "pipestone," is a soft red stone mined by Plains Indians for the manufacture of pipe bowls, among other objects. Catlinite, also known as Pipestone: The Real McCoy! . [39] U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. Pipestone National Monument. . [40] Jerry L. Wahl. Coordinate Use in the Restoration of Lost And Obliterated Public Land Survey Corners. Cadastral Survey, eastern States USDI, Bureau of Land Management. . ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 21:19:02 -0500 From: Neal McLain Reply-To: nmclain@annsgarden.com Organization: Ann's Garden Subject: Towns and Townships - Part 4 of 4 . ======================================= . TOWNS AND TOWNSHIPS - PART 4 of 4 . THE LEGACY OF THE USPLS . ======================================= The legacy of the United States Public Lands Survey is clearly evident today, particularly in areas with relatively flat terrain, in the patterns of roads, streets, fences, and treelines; in the orientation of state, county, and municipal boundary lines; and even in individual property lines. From the air, and even on street maps, the regular rectangular grid pattern stands out clearly, particularly in Midwestern and Great Plains states with relatively level terrain. - Here, for example, is a link to a Yahoo street map of Independence, Kansas (home of our illustrious moderator): . - Even if topographic features disrupt the USPLS grid, streets farther away from the disruption often follow it anyway. Here is a link to a street map of Independence, Wisconsin, where a lake and a railroad disrupt the grid, but most of the streets follow the grid: . - But there are exceptions. Independence, California, located on relatively flat terrain (the Owens Valley), straddles a USPLS range line. But the orientation of its streets completely ignores the USPLS grid: most streets are oriented with respect to the federal highway: . - Compare these examples to Independence, Virginia, where there is no USPLS grid, and where the entire street pattern is dictated by mountainous terrain: . - Of course, if you really want to get carried away looking for places named Independence, here's a link to Independence, Utah. Even though it's just a crossroads, the streets (all two of them) are oriented along USPLS section lines: . In many large metro areas, major streets follow section lines, and intermediate streets fall at regular intervals in between. Examples: - In the Chicago area, numbered streets fall every 1/8th mile, and main thoroughfares fall on section lines at one-mile intervals: 47th Street, 55th Street, 63rd Street, 71st Street, 79th street, 87th Street, 95th Street, 103rd Street. - In the Detroit area, named streets fall at 1/8th mile intervals, and "mile roads" fall on section lines at one-mile intervals: 6 Mile Road, 7 Mile Road, 8 Mile Road, 9 Mile Road. Of course, Detroit-area residents will recognize 8 Mile Road by its other name: Base Line Road. - In the Miami area, numbered avenues fall at 1/10-mile intervals, and main thoroughfares fall on section lines at one-mile intervals: NW 37th Avenue, NW 47th Avenue, NW 57th Avenue, NW 67th Avenue. - In the Ogden area, major streets fall on section lines at one-mile intervals: 1900 West, 2700 West, 3500 West, 4300 West, 5100 West, 5900 West, 6700 West. Intermediate streets are interpolated. In states that have both civil and Congressional townships, most of the civil townships are more-or-less rectangular in shape, reflecting the shapes of the Congressional townships from which they sprang. In many cases, civil townships are coextensive with their respective Congressional townships. A case in point, Dane County, Wisconsin (named for Nathan Dane, one of the authors of the Northwest Ordinance), is posted at: . Even the chain has left its mark: - Although the Gunter's Chain is no longer used today (modern surveyors use steel tapes or electronic measuring devices), the word "chain" still means 66 feet. - The chain (as a unit of measure) pops up repeatedly in land surveys. Many older villages were originally platted with 66-foot lots arranged along 66-foot streets. - Since the days of the earliest settlers, the standard roadway right-of-way has been one chain. One can imagine the scenario: two adjacent land owners each donates a 33-foot strip of land to form the right-of-way for a public road. Initially a farm lane, it would have evolved into a gravel township road, then into a paved road. Even today, many state and federal highways still occupy 66-foot rights-of-way. The number 40, with its multiples and its sub-multiples, has resonated through history for two centuries. Land is still bought and sold in multiples or sub-multiples of 40 acres (although real estate developers seem to be doing most of the buying these days). Over the years, multiples of 40 acres have figured in several contentious political battles: . ======================================= . THE HOMESTEAD ACT OF 1862 . ======================================= The Homestead Act [41] granted 160-acre parcels to any citizen "for the purpose of actual settlement and cultivation" provided that the grantee lived on the land for five years. According to the National Park Service: "A homesteader had only to be the head of a household and at least 21 years of age to claim a 160-acre parcel of land. Settlers from all walks of life including newly arrived immigrants, farmers without land of their own from the East, single women and former slaves came to meet the challenge of "proving up" and keeping this "free land". Each homesteader had to live on the land, build a home, make improvements and farm for 5 years before they were eligible to "prove up". A total filing fee of $18 was the only money required, but sacrifice and hard work exacted a different price from the hopeful settlers. [42] The Homestead Act was a result of many years of controversy over the disposition of public lands. In the mid-1800s, northern states viewed the distribution of free western land as a way to prevent the spread of slavery into the new territories. The southern states, of course, opposed it; however, the secession of eleven southern states during 1860-61, prior to the Civil War, cleared the way for its passage. After President Lincoln signed the act, it became law on January 1, 1863. . ======================================= . "FORTY ACRES AND A MULE" . ======================================= After the Civil War, "Forty Acres and a Mule" became a rallying cry for abolitionists who wanted the government to set aside farm land for freed slaves. The specific reference to "forty acres" appeared in Special Field Order No. 15, issued in January 1865 by Union Army Major General William Tecumseh Sherman during his famous March to the Sea. This order specified that "The islands of Charleston south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for 30 miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. John's River, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the Negroes now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States." [43] This document further states that "each family shall have a plot of not more than forty acres of tillable ground...," but it doesn't mention a mule. The "Proclamation" that Sherman mentions is, of course, The Emancipation Proclamation, issued by President Abraham Lincoln in January 1863: "...all persons held as slaves within said designated [Confederate] States and parts of States are and hence forward shall be free...." [44] Under Sherman's order, many forty-acre parcels actually were distributed to black families. However, Lincoln's assassination in April 1865 changed the course of events. Lincoln's Vice President, Andrew Johnson, succeeded Lincoln as President. Though a southerner and a Democrat, Johnson had remained loyal to the North during the Civil War. But as President during the Reconstruction period after the War, he frequently bent to the wishes of southerners. During the summer and fall of 1865, he issued a number of "special pardons," essentially rescinding Sherman's order and returning the deeded lands back to the former white land owners. Ironically, these lands contain what is now some of the most expensive real estate in the United States: Hilton Head Island and Kiawah Island. As Franklin Raines, the CEO of Fannie Mae, once noted, "On Kiawah Island today, a four-bedroom beach house on one acre of land alone is listed for $3 million." [45] The 40-acre parcels in question must have been surveyed by the metes-and-bounds methods [46] used in all of the eastern states -- they apparently weren't surveyed using the town/range/section plan of the USPLS. But such was the mindset of the day: "40 acres" was the magic number for a farm field, whether or not is had been surveyed under USPLS specifications. . =========================== . THE DAWES ACT OF 1887 . =========================== The Dawes Act [47] attempted to repeat the success of the Homestead Act on Indian reservations. It purported to be a mechanism for allotting up to "one-quarter of a section" (160 acres) of reservation land to native Americans in the hope that land ownership would enable them to become self-sufficient. But there were (at least) four problems with the whole idea: - Homesteaders taking land under the Homestead Act did so voluntarily, and were able to select from a choice of available sites. By contrast, native Americans had little choice: the available land was the land in the reservation. - On many reservations, there was not enough tillable land to satisfy the allotments. - Much of the reservation land was of poor quality, or lacked irrigation. - By creating a market for reservation land, the act opened the reservations to land speculators. Much of the good-quality land (what there was of it) was bought up by non-Indians. But the Act did guarantee that Indians taking up land under the Act would be United States Citizens. California State University at San Marcos provides a comprehensive explanation of the Dawes Act, and the results of its implementation, at . THE CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT The Central Valley Project is a complex network of dams and aqueducts that brings millions of acre-feet of water to farms in California's Central Valley. One website makes the dubious claim that, "The technology used to construct these massive projects was unprecedented before and since; indeed the Central Valley Project is the only man-made feature visible on the earth from the moon." [48] The project was started in 1933 by the California State Legislature, and was subsequently taken over by the Department of the Interior's Bureau of Reclamation. [49] Under the terms of the Reclamation Act of 1902, it was only available to individually- owned farms of less than 160 acres (or 320 acres for a family). But corporate farms -- some of them exceeding thousands of acres -- have still managed to get access to taxpayer-supported water. [50] This is a battle that continues to this day. Peter Barnes, among others, advocates federal action to redistribute California's water. [51] ------ And finally, there's that word "town." What is a town? - In Massachusetts, it's a civil township. - In Oklahoma, it's a Congressional township. - In Wisconsin, it's both. - In Maryland, it's an incorporated municipality. - In everyday vernacular, it's a small urbanized community. And that's the enduring legacy of the USPLS: endless confusion for everybody involved. -------- Posted by Neal McLain nmclain@annsgarden.com Copyright (c) 2002 by Neal McLain ------------------------------------------------- References: [41] The Homestead Act of 1862. . [42] Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Homestead National Monument of America. What is the Homestead Act? . [43] William Tecumseh Sherman. Special Field Orders, No. 15. . [44] Abraham Lincoln. By the President of the United States of America: A Proclamation. . [45] Franklin D. Raines. Remarks prepared for delivery at Howard University Charter Day Convocation, Washington, D.C., March 8, 2002. Federal National Mortgage Association. . [46] Steve Broyles. Metes and Bounds Surveys. Direct Line Software. . [47] An Act to Provide for the Allotment of Lands in Severalty to Indians on the Various Reservations, and to Extend the protection of the Laws of the United States and the Territories over the Indians, and for Other Purposes. . [48] Erik Merriman. Water Policy Review. Environmental Administration 2000, 23 October 2000. . [49] U.S. Department of The Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Mid- Pacific Region. The Central Valley Project: "It's about Water." . [50] Marc Reisner. Cadillac Desert: The American West and Its Disappearing Water, Chapter 10. (New York: Viking Penguin, Inc., 1986). [51] Peter Barnes. The Case for Redistribution, Part 4. . ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2002 17:38:19 EDT From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Towns and Townships - Conclusion Again, my thanks for Neal's work in preparing this lengthy essay on the history of towns and townships for the Digest. This issue and the onr preceeding have been filed in the reports area of the archives for future review as desired. I have seen many examples of legal notices in the newspapers which used very tenuous descriptions of land which was being sold, collected for taxes due, etc. After at least several lines of the legal description, with such statements as 'the northeast one- eighth of the southwest quarter of the north half of so-and-so's addition to such-and-such sub-division' the legal notice then always concludes with the comment, 'commonly known as 412 South Second Street in the town of Indedpendence, KS' to give one example. Legal land descriptions can be quite complex, which I guess is the main reason there are also street numbers, which are in and of themselves except as 'commonly known as' examples, useless for any legal purposes. Something of interest for Oklahoma residents: That state used to be known as 'Indian Territory' prior to being admitted as a state of the USA around 1900 or so. My great-aunt, born in the late 1800's had a birth certificate for herself saying she was born in 'Tulsa, Indian Territory in 1888'. Tahlequah, Oklahoma (formerly Tahlequah, Indian Territory) was and still is the home of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma, of which I am a member since I have 1/16th 'Indian blood' in me which is the smallest fractional blood part allowed for persons to become members of the tribe. That little fraction came from my great grandfather Thomas Townsend who married a woman who was half-blood Cherokee, and one of his sons, Patrick J. Townson who also married a 1/4 blood Cherokee woman. The Cherokee Nation *used to* require that you be full-blooded or at best half-blood to be eligible for membership in the Nation. As the Nation got *very dilluted* and scattered fifty or so years ago, they grudgingly changed their requirements to 1/8 and then 1/16. But to vote in tribal elections, etc one still has to be at least 1/4 I think. Very rarely, I recieve correspondence from them, and the main reason I remain a member of the Nation/tribe is out of sympathy to the Indians for the manner in which the USA government took over their land, moved them all onto reservations, etc. Anyway, thanks to Neal for this fascinating report. And I hope the rest of you enjoyed reading it. PAT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V22 #89 *****************************