============================================================
Washington City
Thursday, 15th April 1824
Sir,
Your letter to me of the 13th last was handed me last evening at night. I will endeavor to answer it fully, frankly and unevasively, which will perhaps correct your views of the subject in part, that is as to my motives, and I believe the motives of Governor Miller and Major Bradford, were pretty much the same as mine. But as I did not come to this place with the expectation of being enquired at, upon the present or such like subjects, nor with any view of volunteering my opinions or information, I am not prepared with memorandums or dates at this time or place to answer your detailed enquiries with precise exactness to the full extent that is within my general knowledge of the subject.
In the letter to which you allude and of which you seem to complain, written by Gov. Miller, Major Bradford and myself on the 25th of last month, and addressed by us to the Chairman of the Land Committee in the U. S. Senate, we gave some of the reasons why we deemed the establishment of a surveying office in Arkansas necessary and amongst those reasons we said that "From the best information we have had, the surveying of a large portion of the lands now surveyed in Arkansas has been badly done, many of the lines badly marked and corners not well established." When we said this it was with reference to the laws and the general instructions on the subject of surveying and with a view to the importance of lines and corners being well established and plainly marked.
In your letter to me of the 13th instant you request me to state to you in writing what particular Townships or Districts have been badly surveyed.
In answering I say that in my travelling over the country I never made a business of keeping notes of the particular Townships, Sections, &c. that I considered to be badly surveyed. But under my contract to survey the confirmed claims of Arkansas in connecting them with public lines &c. I had occasion to see and observe some of the public surveying of which I have notes of the particular Townships and places. And afterwards I had occasion to examine very many of the public lines with a view to making purchases of which also I have some notes. But none of the notes I have on these subjects are here, as I did not expect to have such enquiries as the present to answer, that I must abbreviate to what (or rather to part of what) is within my recollection and even that part which is within my recollection to be given in detail would be too long for anything like a letter. The lands from about Townships five south in Ranges 2, 3 & 4 West to about Townships 2, 3 or 4 North in Range 9 West (extending nearly a N.W. direction) is principally level prairie, most of it poor and wet, interspersed with groves or narrow valleys of poor wet land, thinly timbered with post oak, Black jack &c. This extent of country is I believe all surveyed (or nearly all), that most of the corners pretended to be established are mounds, which were in much the largest part of the extent of country, a few prairie sods thrown together, say 12 or 15 inches high, and about the same in the base, and the post for the corner very often less than two inches diameter. And in some of the places where there were corners established in the timber, they were mis-marked and in many other cases marked with very slight impression in the wood, as if done very hastily, or with a very dull Iron, so as to be difficult and in some cases impossible to distinguish the letters or figures even in one year after the work was done. And in that time or less, but few of the mound corners or posts in the prairie could be found. This, and such other as this, is part of what we alluded to in speaking of establishing lines and corners badly. It is not only Gov. Miller, Major Bradford and I that have observed the above sort of establishment of lines and corners in the above tract of country, but also a great number of others that frequently remarked the same soon after it was surveyed. The road from part of Arkansas to Cadron passing thro' this tract of country, the manner the surveying there was done, was at the time a pretty general subject of remark and ridicule. Now, it would require a Compass and chain to retrace many of those lines or find where the corners were.
I have never myself been in Township 11 North Range 4 West, which is a timbered country near White River and lands are patented to soldiers within it. General report says that the exteriors of that Township is run and marked but that if any of the interior lines are run or the corners established, they are very hard to find. Several persons who have been to examine it have informed me they could find none.
In Townships 1 & 2 South Range 5 East many of the corners are badly marked and several mis-marked. There I had occasion (near the Mississippi) to measure a north and south line the whole length between two sections and found it to be 5.00 ch's (20 rods) too short. Fearing that I might have made the mistake I measured it a second time to be certain and it is so.
I think it is in T4N R3E upon a north and south line between two sections that the line is marked a short distance only from each of the corners one other line near it within about 5.00 ch's is marked the whole distance and marks of the corners blotted out. Mr. Rightor connected the survey of a confirmed claim to this line and noted the particulars in his field book (which is in your office) and I think he informed me that he had mentioned it to you some years ago.
I have frequently examined and although there is plenty of timber I never could find any line (and am pretty sure there is none) marked between fractional Sections 28 & 33 (north of Arkansas River) in T2N R12W nor is there any corner on the river between these fractions though it is timbered.
The foregoing and such as the foregoing is what we alluded to in speaking of lines badly marked and corners badly established. It is true I have not actually run not perhaps one twentieth part of the lines in the Territory the ballance may be better or may be worse, according to common report many of them are not better. It is also true that some of the lines I have seen for Townships together the work is well done; But still more of what I have seen has the appearance, to speak generally, of being done in a hurried and apparently careless way. I might go on and particularize and say that in most of the work I have seen that was done by H. Cassidy, only two trees instead of four at each Section corner were marked with the numbers of the Sections. I think this was about Townships 10 to 14 North Ranges 2 & 3 East leaving 2 sections at each corner without the numbers of the sections marked on any tree to show what they were and that too in the interior of Townships.
Part of Range 10 West, say Township 1 & 2 (or more) North was surveyed with a compass that the needle would not traverse or settle anywhere near accurate, so unfit to work with that Mr. Franklin Chrisman (then a minor surveying I believe his brother's contract) who did the work there said he could not close a section with that compass with fifty yards. Yet the work was done with it in that order.
It would only be adding to my letter what you already know and have (according to the Township plats in the Register's Office, and probably those in the General Land Office) seen and examined yourself for one to say that in speaking of work badly done, having reference to the laws and instructions we had also in view some Townships that had two and some three trees or rows of fractions extending from North to South thro' the same Township. Some of the Townships in range 10 West and particularly Town 3 North in that range, has as you know been surveyed in this way contrary to the laws or any instructions we had or have seen.
What has in some cases afforded great inconvenience to some of the people of the Country was several fractional Townships appearing to have been surveyed and the plats transmitted to the Register and lands advertized for sale by the President could not be sold when the people came to buy, because the plats did not show the quantity contained in the fractions upon the rivers. I believe that several Townships upon Spring river and some on Arkansas were in this situation and could not be sold when they were advertized - say Town 18 North, Ranges 1 & 2 West and others higher up Spring river. Also T 3 or 4 N R14W and part of T4N R15W on Arkansas. All of which (and more too) we had in view to warrant our speaking of surveying "badly done."
You also ask me to state to you in writing what large quantity of land as poor as any in the Territory has been surveyed, that you ought not to have surveyed. And also what tracts of rich lands has not been surveyed that you ought, under the orders of the Government to have had surveyed.
Knowing as I do, nothing about what the orders of the Government to you may have been, I could not pretend to assert that your orders do not require you to survey the very identical lands you have had surveyed and on others; nor could I assert that your orders did not require the lines and corners to be marked and established exactly as it is done.
That a large portion of the lands surveyed in Arkansas is as poor as any there, is a fact as notorious as any can be, known to almost every person who has examined or enquired into or about the subject. Though it is true, that some of the very lands which I call poor has been reported fit for cultivation and patented to soldiers. Yet I am confident that as soon as these lands are subject to a tax, a considerable quantity of the same lands reported fit for cultivation will not sell for the Territorial tax upon them and in my opinion some of them are not worth it.
I would call a large portion of the country which has been surveyed from about Township 4 South, Ranges 2 & 3 West, extending in a north western direction, to Townships 10, 11 & 12 North in Ranges 9, 10 & 11 West in general poor, and some Townships in this extent of country I would call as poor as any in Arkansas, as well as some other Townships that have been surveyed near the Northern boundary of the Territory in parts of Ranges from 2 to 8 West.
Between the Arkansas and Red Rivers where I have not so much knowledge myself of the surveyed lands from the best information I have had, there are many Townships surveyed in which it is not probable a single section would sell in twenty years.
In answering your enquiries as to what tracts of rich lands remain un-surveyed, I can say that in most parts of Arkansas the tracts of rich lands generally are not very extensive and are in most instances best upon or near the principal water courses. I will here name some of the Townships containing portions of rich lands alluded to by Governor Miller, Major Bradford and myself in our letter to which you refer.
Township 2 North in Range 11 West (near Little Rock) contains a reasonable good proportion of rich cultivatable lands and has not been surveyed.
A fractional Township South of White River immediately opposite to Batesville (I think it is fractional T13N R6W) contains some rich bottom lands not surveyed.
Fractional Townships 12 North in Ranges 4 & 5 West (North of White River) contains some very good rich bottom lands not surveyed. The best part of what is called Oil troft bottom, South of White River, is not surveyed; this is said to be the best bottom upon White River, part of it is I think in fractional T12N R4W.
Fractional Townships 8 & 9 North, Range 4 East bordering the western margin of the St. Francis River is not surveyed and contains some very good and rich lands.
None of the public lands bordering on the Northwardly margin of the Arkansas River from T1N R10W down to about T 5 or 6 S, R 4 or 5 W have been surveyed. A large portion of these lands bordering on or near the river are as rich as any in the Territory, much of them covered with heavy cane and unprofitable surveying. All the lower part of this un-surveyed tract is said to be included in an un-confirmed Spanish claim originally owned by Elisha Winter. That this might have been inferred to have been the reason why these rich lands were not surveyed, only that it appears that most of the prairie and thin timbered lands within the same un-confirmed claim have been surveyed and patented to soldiers.
As I before observed I am less acquainted with the particulars in detail in relation to the surveyed or un-surveyed lands on or near Red River than in the more northern and middle parts of the Territory. But from the best information I have had, most of the richest cane lands on that river from a short distance above Long Prairie up are not surveyed and that most of the prairie and thin timbered lands at and near Mount Prairie, Prairie de handozan [?] &c bordering the same neighborhood have been long ago surveyed.
You ask me for a list of the names of Arkansas deputy surveyors who have had the most unprofitable surveying contracts &c. and the time they applied for surveying &c.
This is asking me for particulars which you ought to know in detail better than I. It being a matter in which I had taken but little interest. And as I have been but small portions of my time at St. Louis, as you know, for the last 6 or 7 years. It would be difficult for me to detail the particulars of all who applied to you there for contracts and at what time &c. Most of what I know upon this subject is information I have had from others and what is generally said and believed. Out of the little falling within my own knowledge upon this subject, I will say, that Mr. Nicholas Rightor, whom I believe to be a good and accurate surveyor residing in Arkansas, has within my knowledge had several contracts none of which were of the large and profitable sort, that were given to some other deputies. It is, however, just that I should add that I have not heard Mr. Rightor complain.
Mr. McGuire, Mr. Thomas Mathers, Mr. James Trimble, Col. Joseph Hardin, Capt. C. H. Pelham, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Peel, Mr. Richardson and various other surveyors residing in Arkansas have each done more or less of the public surveying in that Territory either upon contracts of their own or for deputy surveyors who had contracts. Though I believe some of those I have named never had a contract of their own and whether or not they were ever deputized or sworn in doing the surveying upon the contracts of others or whether each of them were fit and qualified to survey at all or not is more than I know or could say, either for or against some of them. But part of them I am satisfied are good surveyors. I know that each of them have surveyed of the public lands, that they reside in the Territory, and that none of them have had any of the large and most profitable contracts of surveying there, and knowing this felt warranted in saying what I did in the letter to which you allude of the 25th ult.
The suits which you (in your letter before me) threaten to bring against such deputies as have slighted their work seems to me rather foreign to the general subject of your enquiries. The suggestion may look well enough on paper, but could not profit the Government in practice. It being well known that some of the surveyors who have done large and profitable portions of the work, have lived fast and expensive enough to be at this time unable to pay their debts and still less able to pay damages to the Government. Some of them yet owing for the bread they and their hands eat while doing the surveying as some of the people of Arkansas can to their sorrow attest. Others of them dead and their estates insolvent and perhaps others of them in Texas. That I believe in general those who would be most able at this time to pay damages are those who surveyed their contracts the best.
I have not stated (and in many cases do not know) what particular surveyors did the work in the several different parts of the country, that I have had occasion to speak of in answering your enquiries having described as well as I could the parts of the country to which I have had occasion to allude, the contracts in your office can inform you who ought to have done the work.
In your letter before me you charge me of having for an object in writing the letter to which you refer of the 25th ult. "To promote the schemes of your inveterate and vindictive enemy." This I deny. I came to this place to attend to my own business only, determined not to go far in volunteering opinions for or against friends or enemies in matters that did not directly concern me. By more than one committee in Congress I have been requested to make statements of facts. I have done so and always endeavored to avoid what I deemed immaterial to the subject of enquiry and upon this principle avoided the particular detail of this subject that you have now exacted from me. The bill making appropriations for future surveying had been sent to the Senate and its opponents about to urge the large quantities of surveyed lands remaining unsold as lessening the necessity of surveying more soon until a better proportion of the surveyed lands should be sold; that it seemed the surveying poor lands first would prevent the surveying and settlement of those that were better until after some proportion of the poor lands should be sold. Governor Miller, Major Bradford and I then giving our opinions on the subject of establishing a Surveyor's office in Arkansas &c. thought it necessary and just that it should be done and gave our reasons for it without having any view to you or to your friends or your enemies or to deputy surveyors personally and on the contrary, exercised every forbearance other than to state facts that we knew and believed, which might have a tendency to promote the object, which we conceived to be just and necessary. Otherwise we might have gone in to all the detail and particulars which you now exact and more too. Now for the first time since I have been in this City and that at your special instance and request I have gone more fully into the subject than I had intended to have otherwise done.
Though writing is laborious to me, yet if you have any further enquiries to make that shall be attended to and answered according to truth and the best of my knowledge on the subject.
Your Obedient Servant
William Russell
[To] General William Rector
