« PreviousContinue »
he was claiming what did not belong to him, and so told him. Then I referred to my copy of U. S. land surveys (of which I copy every one that enters the general land-office in Washington, on a scale of one mile to one inch, with my own hand), and showed him, under date of March 20, 1876, my copy of sectionized plats, covering not only the region referred to, Nos. 142 and 143, N. R., 36 W., 5th Pm. mer., but all the rest of the area covered by his route to and from the lake. He expressed surprise at the facts shown him, and said he regretted exceedingly that he had not known them before he went, for such maps would have helped him greatly in determining many questions of geography, etc. He concluded to
THE ITASCA LAKE REGION, REDUCED FROM THE OFFICIAL PLATS IN THE U. S. GENERAL LAND-OFFICE, WASHINGTON, D. C., AS SURVEYED IN SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER, 1875.
have his maps engraved, and requested me to add some things and correct others, such as the form and proportion of lakes, etc., and to make more general resemblance to facts, only he insisted on having what he calls Lake Glazier much larger than the meandered exhibits on the L. O. plats. The result of my attempts to improve his draught was to make the resemblance to facts greater, and at the same time, as now appears, to give. greater strength to his claim of exploration, and to accurate knowledge on the part of his guide."
And now, finally, to settle once for all the worth of Captain Glazier's claim, Mr. Bartlett Channing Paine comes into court, and, as state's
evidence, gives the following testimony in a recent interview in the St. Paul Pioneer press:
"I wanted to avoid this controversy, but I suppose I might as well tell you whatever I can. Yes, I accompanied Mr. Glazier on his journey at a stipulated salary per week. I went along to write up the incidents of the trip. I suppose Mr. Glazier's object in taking me along was to give a more extended notoriety through what matter I might furnish the press. When we left for the starting-point of our journey, our objective point was Lake Itasca. Glazier had no idea of exploring any lake beyond that point. The idea first entered his head when we were part way between Brainerd and Leech Lake. There
we met an old man who told us that Itasca was not the farthest lake, and that there was another one a little beyond Itasca. Glazier then began inquiring among the Indians, and he finally found one who seemed to know all about this lake. He had, according to his story, grown potatoes on the bank of the lake. That settled it: so Captain Glazier decided to see this lake. We struck Lake Itasca about halfway up the southeast arm, and paddled to Schoolcraft's Island. Next day we made our camp a short distance from the end of the south-west arm to the lake that the Indians had told us about. Glazier was greatly delighted with the lake. We sailed around it till we came to the promontory shown in the map. There the captain made a great speech about the
discovery of the source of the Mississippi. When he finished his speech, I, on a suggestion previously made by him, proposed that the lake be named Lake Glazier.' The third member joined in the suggestion, as did the Indians. That night we began our return journey, and when we reached St. Paul I went up and examined the charts in the surveyor-general's office to see if the lake was an actual discovery. I found it was on the government maps, but I did not tell Glazier. Why? Oh, well, I thought I would let him think he had made a discovery. I accompanied him to the Gulf of Mexico. He had no more claim to the discovery than you have. Mr. Glazier recently wrote to me, asking if I had any objections to his using my signature to a few communications to certain newspapers or magazines. I replied that I had. There has since appeared an article in the December number of Outing on the subject of this controversy. It had my name attached, but I don't know by whom it was written. I didn't write it. In Mr. Glazier's recent letter I see that he puts forth the statement that the lake was named Lake Glazier' contrary to his wishes, and that he desired the Indian name 'Pokegama.' That statement is not true. The captain was not only anxious, but extremely solicitous, that the lake should be named 'Lake Glazier.' Captain Glazier took no observations at Elk Lake. He had no instruments with him."
As to the name of Elk Lake, the former surveyor-general of Minnesota, who had charge of the government land-office at St. Paul, states, that, acting in accordance with his general instructions from the government, he called it Elk Lake, in order to retain the designation originally used by the Indians for the larger lake, which Schoolcraft named Itasca. We certainly think that the official designation should stand.
It will be noted that the map shows parts of two adjoining townships. The six eastern sections (square miles) are in township 143 N., range 35 W., and the other thirty sections are in township 143 N., range 36 W., 5th principal meridian.
It only remains for us to say that we can most thoroughly vouch for the care and accuracy with which this exploration has been made. Mr. Hopewell Clarke, the chief of the party, has long been one of the most experienced and capable land explorers of the N. P. R. R. Co. In this service he has spent years in inspecting the timber, and verifying the work of the government surveyors throughout the immense land-grant of that company. We placed at his disposal every instrument for an accurate determination of elevations, levels, and drainage, which could be desired for the most complete execution of his work. He had in his party two capable assistants; and we place the record of their exploration before the public, satisfied that it is the conscientious work of the very
best men whom we could command for the important task which we undertook to accomplish. IVISON, BLAKEMAN, TAYLOR, & Co.
MESSRS. IVISON, BLAKEMAN, TAYLOR, & Co. 753 Broadway, New York.
Gentlemen, I herewith submit my report of the trip to the head waters of the Mississippi, undertaken in your interest in the month of October last. Among the causes of delay in forwarding this paper, were my sickness immediately after my return from Itasca; the great quantity of facts contained in my field notes, which I desired to condense as much as possible; some mishaps which always enter more or less into such undertakings; and a great pressure of regular work in the line of my daily duties consequent upon my absence and illness.
The route which I selected for my trip was by N. P. R. R. to Morley; thence by stage to Park Rapids; and the balance of the way by wagon conveyance to the south-eastern arm of Lake Itasca.
The company consisted of three persons,-one a trained land-explorer, a second to serve as driver and general assistant, and myself as the leader of the party. I had originally planned taking others with me; but I am satisfied, that, with the amount of work we had to do, it would have taken twice as long with help not accustomed to the woods, and I am afraid we would have killed a green man, travelling and working as we did. So, though at first I was disappointed at the loss of one or two whom I had expected to have with me, I am satisfied that the party would not have been better made up than as it was.
In the matter of equipment for measurements and for observations, we had the following: pocket-sextant, aneroid barometer, drainage-level, Locke's hand-level, thermometers, surveyor's compass and chain, levelling-rod, pocket-compasses.
We arrived at the south-eastern arm of Lake Itasca at noon on the 13th of October, and after taking dinner embarked at once for the southwestern arm, which we proposed to make the centre of our operations. We approached this portion of the lake with considerable curiosity, and as we drew near our journey's end we stopped a few moments to admire the scene before us.
Directly in front, a small, bare, mound-like elevation or knoll rises from the edge of Lake Itasca near the centre of an open space of about ten acres between it and Elk Lake. The inlet of the principal stream flowing into Lake Itasca is seen on the right, and the outlet of Elk Lake comes in at the left, of the knoll. We are looking south
ward; and to the right the shore of the lake is lined with pine, while the left shore and all the upper (southern) end is bordered with tamarack, except the open space in front, which is bare except for a few bushes and some rice-grass. The Height of Land is in plain view two miles and a half to the south; and between these bills and the knoll there is a peculiar light familiar to woodsmen, which indicates an opening or water beyond. It is a striking scene. There is nothing like it anywhere else on the shores of Itasca. And while looking at it, our thoughts went back to the time Nicollet was there; and we could not but reflect that Francis Brunet, or Kegwedzissag, his Indian guide, would call his attention to it, and no doubt they landed and explored Elk Lake before they went in any other direction. The moment we saw this open country between the lakes, we were satisfied that no man accustomed to the wilderness, certainly no explorer of Nicollet's experience, no guide as trained as his Indian was, could go there on the business on which they were engaged, and miss seeing Elk Lake, unless he were blind.
As night was rapidly approaching, we landed, and selected a place for camp in the open space between the two lakes; and while one of my assistants was busy pitching camp, and the other prepared supper, I employed the time till dark unpacking and adjusting my instruments, and planning the work for the following days. In all, we spent five days exploring and surveying the basin of Itasca. Wherever there was especial care and detail required, we gave our best and most diligent efforts to the work, and I believe there is no material point regarding the sources of the feeders of Lake Itasca which is not covered by this report.
In presenting the results of our work during our stay at Lake Itasca, I shall not attempt to report the operations of each day, but rather state the general conclusions and facts obtained from the thorough exploration of every part of the basin of the lake.
In following the heights of land which form the southern boundary of the basin of Lake Itasca, the general trend of the crest is from north-west to south-east; but it takes a course almost directly east after striking the north-east quarter of section 33, as shown on the map. It also sends out spurs, one striking northward from section 35, and another, also northward, from section 31 in the eastern of the two townships shown. The spur striking north from section 35 divides the Itasca basin into two parts, the western furnishing the feeders of the south-western arm of the lake, and the eastern furnishing the
single feeder of the south-eastern arm. It is not an unbroken ridge of hills, nor are these spurs perfectly defined; but they are, rather, groups and successions of hills, with the general direction given above. There is also a marked difference in the character of the springs of these two parts of the Itasca basin. The western bowl furnishes the feeders that are steady and constant during the year, and the largest feeder lies at the extreme western edge of this bowl. The eastern bowl furnishes a single feeder, which is probably nearly dry parts of the year. It is thus evident that the western streams are fed mainly by living springs, artesian in their character, being supplied by water which comes through the strata of the earth from ponds to the west and south, some of them, perhaps, miles away. The single stream of the south-eastern arm simply drains the bowl in which it flows, and while in the rainy season it may be quite a torrent, part of the year it is comparatively dry. I regard this as important in determining the ultimate sources of the waters of the upper Mississippi, it being evident that all the water which flows into the river from Lake Itasca is either surface drainage or comes from reservoirs and ponds which lie between the head waters of the Mississippi and the head waters of the Red River. To the north the elevation of the crest of the Height of Land varies from 150 to 250 feet above the level of Lake Itasca. In the western half of section 21 the height is about 200 feet; in sections 28 and 33 it rises to 225 and 250 feet; in section 34 it is 250 feet in the west part of the section, and 200 feet in the eastern; 175 feet in section 26. In section 23 the height is 100 feet, sloping gradually to 75 feet in section 14. The knoll in the western part of section 22 is 150 feet above the level of the lake. To the north, along the border of Elk Lake, the ridge is 90 feet high. Just south of the lake marked D the elevation is 120 feet, and just north of the lake marked E it is 100 feet. These data are sufficient to show the irregular and broken character of the land in this region.
One of the most interesting parts of our work was the survey and examination of the narrow strip of land between Lake Itasca and Elk Lake. We found it to be 350 feet wide at the narrowest point between the lakes, and 520 feet measuring along the crooked trail at the base of the knoll. The lakes run nearly parallel for 1,020 feet, and the strip of land contains in all about 10 acres.
The portion shown as hilly on the plat is a small mound-like elevation, nearly devoid of all timber, which rises with a gradual slope south from Lake Itasca to a height of 33 feet, and descends abruptly to the shore of Elk Lake. Its direction between
the lakes is nearly east and west. Its height above Lake Itasca at its western base is 10 feet, where it is less than 100 feet wide; and thus, if each lake were a little higher in elevation, they would at this point be within 100 feet of each other. The highest point on the trail between the two lakes is 12 feet. The ridge extends to the outlet of Elk Lake, from which point Lake Itasca is in full view. Another hill rises to the east of the outlet, leaving an opening 12 feet wide, through which the stream flows with a rapid cur
nothing from springs along its route, and its increased width and depth are caused by back water from Lake Itasca. It is a very pretty little stream, and has been cleared out by the Indians, who go there annually and place fish-traps to catch the fish that run between the two lakes. The difference in elevation between the two lakes is 1 foot and 1 inch. The stream between the two lakes falls 6 inches between Elk Lake and a point where it enters the tamarack swamp, in the first hundred feet of its course; the balance, 7
rent, in a channel 6 feet wide and 6 inches deep. The balance of the land between the two lakes on either side of the creek, is a tamarack swamp. The outlet of Elk Lake flows nearly north-east 80 feet, and enters the tamarack swamp, where its general direction is north for 600 feet, until it reaches a point within 110 feet of Lake Itasca. It then curves back toward Elk Lake, and finally enters Lake Itasca, its whole course from Elk Lake measuring 1,084 feet. Where it debouches into Lake Itasca, it is 7 feet wide and 8 inches deep. We noted its width at numerous places in its course, and found it to vary from 6 to 12 feet, and its depth from 2 to 8 inches. It gains
inches, measures the fall in its course through the tamarack swamp of nearly 1,000 feet.
Leaving this interesting part of the lake for a time, I will give some details in regard to the other feeders of the lake. The stream entering the south-east arm, as above remarked, is evidently quite variable in its character. At times, apparently, it is very shallow; but after heavy rains it is quite a torrent, and drains the lakes which form during the wet season, marked Q, R, and S. When the stream is at its best, it is fully 6 feet wide and a foot deep. The stream entering Lake Itasca at a is merely a sluggish creek, draining the marsh to the northward in sections 23 and