The Eastern and Southern Boundary Survey

Rankin’s second journal are notes written by George Gould and part of it details his survey of the eastern and southern boundaries of the Saugeen Reserve. By reading his journal and following his chronology, the journal is further evidence that he positioned the NE corner of the Saugeen Reserve at Lot 25/26 (Main Street). Gould noted how many chains he surveyed each day over the nine days it took him to survey both boundaries. He also made notes to enable us to follow his progress.

The following two pictures below are copies of two pages of Rankin’s (Gould’s) journal when he was surveying the eastern and southern boundaries of the Saugeen Reserve. The third page is a recopy of the second so I could make notes to coordinate his journal date that has the number of chains surveyed, with the diary notes describing what he did.

The first entry is the most important since it marks the distance they traversed from the mouth of the Sauble River to get to the Indian Boundary. Charles Rankin was present on the first day. Significant for two reasons:

1. Gould previously ran into considerable trouble from the Saugeen Band in relation to the western boundary and had to call on Rankin that time to come and put an end to the dispute. Rankin most likely realized he should be present this time.

2. Once Lot 25/26 (Main Street) is located, Rankin feels he no longer needs to stay to supervise the survey of the eastern boundary and leaves it to Gould.

I used the Ontario Topographic mapping tool to follow Gould’s survey each of the nine days. The mouth of the river was not as far west in 1855, so I adjusted it accordingly to match the October 12th, 1855 draft map. The first day, September 4th, he and Rankin traversed 177 chains as seen below. My first measurement was off by 1/100th of a mile or 52 feet.

What is most remarkable about the first day is that they finished their survey at Lot 25/26 (Main Street). We cannot be led to believe that this is just another coincidence in connection with Lot 25/26 (Main Street). Amazing! According to INAC/Saugeen Band, Lot 25/26 has nothing to do with the NE corner of the Saugeen Reserve, yet this is the third separate and distinct time, we can connect it to that point from historical documents.

One might ask: Why would Rankin begin his survey of the eastern boundary from the Sauble River if midpoint Lot 31 does not mark the NE corner of the Saugeen Reserve? The answer to this is the key to why there is a notation at midpoint Lot 31 that reads NE < Ind. Res. The BBR provides the rationale, but it doesn't definitively explain why Rankin began at the Sauble River and how this influenced the creation of the NE < Ind. Res. notation. 

To begin, we must remember that Rankin traversed the shoreline from the mouth of the Saugeen River to the mouth of the Sauble River in October of 1855. During this time, he measures distances in 61 straight line segments in which three significant locations and distances can be identified: Saugeen to Sauble River, Saugeen River to original NW position of the western boundary, and he already knows the amount of distance for the Saugeen Reserve shoreline boundary from the treaty instructions.   

Using his knowledge of distances from the Saugeen to Sauble River traverse, he is able to establish the True North line easier from the Sauble River. It is a shorter distance to locate the True North line and the NE corner of the Saugeen Reserve at Lot 25 from the originally believed position of the NE corner of the Saugeen Reserve. From his calculations, all he has to do is travel 0.68 miles from the mouth of the Sauble River to midpoint lot 31 along level sandy beach. He then establishes the True North line (most likely 924 feet from midpoint Lot 31) and follows the line through the water to where it meets land at Lot 25 to identify the NE corner.  

Otherwise he would have to travel 9 1/2 miles from the original NW position of the western boundary to midpoint lot 31 and then back down to Lot 25/26 again to locate the NE corner of the Saugeen Reserve. Much of the first half of that distance is over difficult bluffs and rocky terrain along the shoreline. In other words he can either choose to travel a short, direct, level and straight line from the Sauble River to Lot 25/26 or a long, curving, rocky, bluff-filled, line from the original position of the NW boundary to midpoint Lot 31 and then turn and come back down to Lot 25/26. The reason, therefore, to start the eastern boundary survey of the Saugeen Reserve at the Sauble River to locate the NE corner at Lot 25/26 is: it is a shorter, easier distance which is more efficient; 2.2 miles as opposed to 11 miles. Pg. 51 BBR  

It would have been just as difficult to traverse the 9 1/2 miles from the amended boundary at Copway Road to locate the NE corner and he most likely didn't know the Saugeen River to Copway Road distance to allow a calculation from the Sauble River. The Copway Road Amendment also was not yet official on September 4th and wouldn't be until September 27th. The eastern boundary had to be found from where the True North line first made contact with water to establish the "spot on the coast."  Midpoint lot 31 was the obvious choice since it was a calculable starting point. From that point, Rankin could establish the True North line which ultimately led to Lot 25 as the "spot on the coast." 

This explains why Rankin locates the NE corner of the Saugeen Reserve at Lot 25/26 on all his maps, why there is a notation at midpoint lot 31 on the draft map, why the True North line is shown as a construction line from Lot 25/26 to midpoint Lot 31 on the draft map, and why the actual physical post was marked "according to treaty boundary running south." He marked and used the original treaty location because he had the distances recorded to locate it as a starting point for an easy and much shorter traverse. His intention is not to identify the Saugeen Reserve's NE corner location point. 

What is difficult about the first day, however, is that Gould’s note is ambiguous and hard to decipher. He notes: 

“Continued the traverse from the mouth of the Au Sable to the cont (continuation)? of the Ind. Boundary (&)? contd (continued)? the Boundary.” 

Update March 6: As usual ambiguity turns to clarity once you step away from a problem and let it filter through you without giving it much thought. Although difficult to decipher, most agree that the first part of Gould's entry reads "to the continuation of the Ind. Boundary." I would also agree, but I have been reading it the way everyone else has interpreted it. Meaning the "continuation" is from North to South. Yes, they ran the line north to south, but the continuation is from South to North. Gould is referring to the "continuation" of the Indian Boundary from South to North. "Continuation" meaning "extension" of Indian Boundary which would be paraphrased to "Continued the traverse from the mouth of the Au Sable to the "extension" of the Ind. Boundary. Think of how many times we, ourselves, use the term continuation as a reference to an extension.

Four things support this assessment:

1. The portion of the "continuation" line referenced is represented as a construction line (definition below in next paragraph) on the draft map from Lot 25/26 to midpoint Lot 31.

2. Reference to the "continuation" line stops at Lot 25/26

3. The draft map shows the NE corner of the Saugeen Reserve at Lot 25/26.
4. At Lot 25/26, Rankin notes in his journal "leaving Gould to proceed with the Indian Boundary..."

Supporting evidence would dictate, they traversed to midpoint Lot 31, located the original mark for the NE corner, and simply recorded "continued the boundary"  without adding "through the water on the True North line" and assumed "continuation" was clear to mean "extension." This portion of the survey is clearly marked on the Oct 12th, 1855 draft map and the east boundary, without doubt, runs through the water and is sketched as a construction line (a line that doesn't actually exist except for its purpose; in this case to connect midpoint lot 31 to lot 25/26 Main Street) not a boundary line. There is no question it is a construction line because it extends further north from midpoint Lot 31 to the Sauble River. This extension portion of the line also does not exist except for the purpose of connecting the eastern boundary of the Saugeen Reserve with the eastern boundary of Chief's Point. To insist that Gould's notation somehow marks the Indian Reserve boundary in the water from Lot 25/26 to midpoint Lot 31 means that the boundary ends a little east of Chief's Point on the south side of the Sauble River. Considering the engineering firm reported the actual notation on the post to say “NE angle of Saugeen Reserve according to treaty boundary running south” in regard to the "continuation" portion, basically confirms it is a construction line. 

Logic would suggest they stopped at midpoint Lot 31 to line up the True North line with the shore at Lot 25/26. Rankin knew where Lot 25/26 was by drawing it on the Grey/Bruce map in January, 1855, but this was the first time he located it physically in the field. Gould's journal notation would most likely have seemed clear and obvious to them, not realizing the impact it would make 160 years later. I would hazard to guess they would be stunned to learn the amount of speculation that has gone on in relation to this survey.

By examining the notations from September 4th, it appears that Rankin and Gould both refer to the Indian Boundary loosely and referred everything on the True North line or anything done in connection to the east boundary survey that day as the Indian boundary. It is understandable considering the focus of the survey is the eastern boundary of the Indian Reserve and the initial marked location of the NE corner was at midpoint Lot 31. Only 1.4 miles of the 9 miles surveyed on the True North line is not part of the Saugeen eastern boundary during the five day survey, so loose "Indian Boundary" references are not surprising. 

Another example of how they used references loosely during the eastern and southern boundary survey is when Gould commences surveying the southern boundary. Gould first references the southern boundary line as the "Indian Boundary" and the next three references of the line are "the 1/2 mile strip."

As I said, the focus of the first five days is the Saugeen eastern boundary. To illustrate loose references further, Rankin makes this notation on September 4th in his own journal:

“Commenced and ran down 2 miles on boundary of Saugeen Indian Reserve and afterwards left the camp together with Claudius Sking to return to the village to give general superintendence to other matters connected with the survey, leaving Gould to proceed with the Indian boundary and other parts of Amabel.”

Either Rankin’s note implies that the full two miles is the Saugeen Boundary or, after they ran down the two miles they were then on the boundary of the Saugeen Reserve. We know that the NE boundary of the Saugeen Reserve does not start at the mouth of the Sauble River and is marked on all maps at Lot 25/26 (Main Street), so that could not be Rankin’s meaning. Whether poorly or loosely worded, the latter makes more sense and is supported by facts. Rankin first says they ran down on the boundary of the Saugeen Reserve, but then implies that the Indian boundary survey has not yet been started. He remarks, “leaving Gould to proceed with the Indian boundary.” In other words, he left Gould to begin the Saugeen boundary. This also makes the most sense since Lot 25/26 (Main Street) is marked as the NE corner of the Saugeen Reserve on every Rankin map. It is the third instance it can be established this way from three different sources and starting points and also can be established this way from two different and intersecting points.

1. By the treaty instructions that the eastern boundary runs parallel to the western boundary and first intersects with the water’s edge ("spot on the coast") at Lot 25/26 (Main Street) as illustrated on the Grey/Bruce map of January 1855.

2. The traverse on September 4th, 1855 leaving Gould “to proceed with the Indian boundary” after they ended the survey for that day at Lot 25/26.

3. The measurement from the Copway Road amended NW position of the western boundary to Lot 25/26 equals almost exactly 9 ½ miles as instructed in Treaty 72. 

4. After the Copway Road Amendment, both the eastern boundary being parallel to the western boundary and the 9 1/2 mile measurement from Copway Road meet exactly at Lot 25/26 (Main Street). The amendment is the  only way for the Treaty instructions to be mathematically possible.

Could all four of these mathematically proven instances identifying Lot 25/26 (Main Street) as the NE corner of the Saugeen Reserve be pure coincidence? What would be the odds of such a thing? Can an argument this strong be made for the INAC/Saugeen Band claim? 

An argument can be made that midpoint Lot 31 has facts to mark it as the NE corner of the Saugeen Reserve, but it only has two, and they both break down under analysis. Not to mention there is no map in existence that marks it that way. All three of Rankin’s maps mark Lot 25/26 (Main Street) as the NE corner. The arguments have been discussed before, but here are the flaws once again.

1. The measurement equaling 9 ½ miles from the original NW position of the western boundary to midpoint Lot 31 is only relevant if the Copway Road Amendment doesn’t exist. It has also been discussed, ad nauseum, that land cannot exist between Lot 25/26 (Main Street) and midpoint Lot 31. In the INAC/Saugeen Band example of the 9 ½ mile measurement, without a width at the shoreline that can match up with the eastern boundary, it is impossible. And, just to make this point crystal clear…

2. While the eastern boundary does contact the shore at midpoint Lot 31, it only does so after it has traveled through the water of Lake Huron between Lot 25/26 and midpoint Lot 31, once again making it impossible for land to exist. The Copway Road Amendment makes the eastern boundary contact with midpoint Lot 31 irrelevant.

It boils down to this: Either the Treaty 72 instructions, the Allenford Pow-Wow to resolve the western boundary dispute, the supporting notes, and all the maps produced that show that the NE corner of the Saugeen Reserve is located at Lot 25/26 (Main Street) are somehow wrong,

Or…

The ambiguities of some notations, that can be interpreted to support either argument of the land claim is what is irrelevant. That being said, one thing cannot be ignored: There are absolutely no ambiguities as to boundary limits on Rankin’s 1856 final map and there are also no ambiguities as to how the treaty instructions and the Copway Road amendment support those limits.

To show that the measurements of the eastern boundary and then the southern boundary are accurate as recorded in the journal pages, I continued the survey for the rest of the eight days.

The illustration below is the completed eastern boundary

I then started down the southern boundary to prove I was following the instructions accurately.

This research impressed me. It proved to me, for this exercise, you don’t have to be an expert to correctly interpret what the survey notes mean. Although my result wasn’t 100% exact, it was so close that, after more than 160 years, it left room for a small margin of error and showed that I understood what I was doing.

This is the completed east boundary (beginning at Main Street) and south boundary as a result of following the total nine days from the journal.