How the States Got Their Shapes Too_ The People Behind the Borderlines - Mark Stein [125]
On February 24, 1863, Congress created the Territory of Arizona, stipulating the boundaries advocated by Watts on behalf of his Hispanic constituents.
Though Watts remained active in Republican politics, he chose to return to his law practice. Following that year’s November elections, John C. Watts introduced President Lincoln to New Mexico’s newly elected territorial delegate, Francisco Perea.
MONTANA, IDAHO
SIDNEY EDGERTON AND JAMES ASHLEY
Good as Gold
Gov. Edgerton was not a member of the Committee on Territories, and I never heard of his having anything to do, directly or indirectly, with the organization of the territory of Montana or with fixing its western boundary.
—JAMES M. ASHLEY
I had many interviews with Gov. Ashley, who was a strong supporter of the bill [to create Montana] and, as chairman of the Committee on Territories, had a great influence.
—SIDNEY EDGERTON1
Clearly, one of these men had a faulty memory. The fault line dividing their recollections can be seen on the map. It is the boundary between Montana and Idaho—a border that often raises questions, since Montana would be quite a large state even if it didn’t overflow its straight lines as it barrels into the Rockies, pushing Idaho every which way until only a thin panhandle remains.
Sidney Edgerton was an Ohio congressman from 1859 to 1863. James Ashley was an Ohio congressman from 1859 to 1869. Both were abolitionists who assisted escaped slaves via Ohio’s Underground Railroad. They were good men, but not perfect, as hinted in their divergent recollections regarding Montana’s western border.
Following Edgerton’s second term in Congress, President Lincoln appointed him to a judgeship in the newly formed Idaho Territory. This first territorial incarnation of Idaho was very different from today’s state. It encompassed present-day Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming. Edgerton and his family set off for the arduous journey to the territorial capital at Lewiston. But they stopped short of their destination. “It is difficult to understand what it meant in 1863 to undertake a journey from Ohio to Lewiston, the capital of Idaho,” Edgerton’s daughter later recollected. “News of the recent gold discoveries at Bannack, together with the fact that the [winter] season was somewhat advanced, brought about the decision to go [to Bannack].”2
Another reason for not continuing to Lewiston was the fact that it was not in Edgerton’s judicial district. Some historians believe that territorial governor William H. Wallace was demonstrating his well-known opposition to imported judges by assigning to this Ohioan a vast and sparsely populated district east of the Rockies. Others believe that Wallace’s insult motivated Edgerton’s efforts the following year to push the western border of the Montana Territory as far as he could into the original Idaho Territory. And others, such as eminent Idaho historian Merle W. Wells, maintain that, because of the gold discoveries at Bannack, “Edgerton’s district had far greater importance than the one containing the temporary capital, and because of his financial interests in the district to which he was assigned, Edgerton had no great desire to make the long, hard trip to Lewiston.”3
Financial interests? Perhaps Judge Edgerton would have recused himself from any cases in which he would have had a conflict of interest. At it happened, he never presided at any trials because, before the snows had melted, he had accepted the task of returning to Washington to represent this region in the creation of the Montana Territory.
Whatever his motive, time was of the essence. James Ashley, chairman of the House Committee on Territories, was about to set the boundary ball in motion. During the previous Congress, Ashley had proposed radically different—and far more equal—borders for Idaho and Montana. Ashley’s plan was to divide the region horizontally, with Montana occupying the southern