... and that's " Something you should know. "

Heard this on the radio: he was talking about the origin of the
states/shapes.

The original 13 colonies had defined their areas, and when the US
accumulated the rest of the country there came a point in time when it was
just expedient to chop up into squares: however...

Massachusetts is one of the original states, but its border has changed.
Notably the Southwest corner of Massachusetts used to be a point and now
it looks like it's been snipped off and given to New York. That's because
there was a town there and the only road to the town was through New York
or Connecticut. In Massachusetts, authorities had a difficult time getting
to that town and it attracted a lot of bad guys. So, in the 1850's they
agreed to let New York have that town and clean out the vice.
If you look, you'll still see where " Under Mountain Road " defines the
snipped area.
Originally Vermont was part of New York.

Comes the Revolution, Vermont says, "We want to be our own colony."
Continental Congress says, "Sorry you're part of New York." Vermont says,
"Then we'll fight with the British." And only George Washington's
intervention stopped it when he said, "Our troops will not fight against
people from Vermont." And then Congress said, begrudgingly "You can be
your own entity too."

Congress created Mid-western and western states to be roughly equal except
California and Texas.

The fact is that Congress did not create California or Texas - they
created themselves. In the case of California, we acquired that line with
the Mexican War in 1848 and within one year so many people flocked to
California that before Congress could create a territorial government,
California created its own territorial government and sent a proposal to
Congress with boundaries, skipping the whole territorial process - it
wanted to go right to statehood.

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 20:28:22 -0400, "- Bobb -"
wrote:

Heard this on the radio: he was talking about the origin of the
states/shapes.

The original 13 colonies had defined their areas,

Actually, they hadn't. A number of boundaries of the new states
after the Revolution had to be ironed out later.

and when the US
accumulated the rest of the country there came a point in time when it was
just expedient to chop up into squares:

I guess that explains Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, Indiana and
Ohio. And Oklahoma and Minnesota. Adn maybe Iowa.

however...

Massachusetts is one of the original states, but its border has changed.
Notably the Southwest corner of Massachusetts used to be a point and now
it looks like it's been snipped off and given to New York. That's because
there was a town there and the only road to the town was through New York
or Connecticut. In Massachusetts, authorities had a difficult time getting
to that town and it attracted a lot of bad guys. So, in the 1850's they
agreed to let New York have that town and clean out the vice.
If you look, you'll still see where " Under Mountain Road " defines the
snipped area.

Could be.

Originally Vermont was part of New York.

Comes the Revolution, Vermont says, "We want to be our own colony."
Continental Congress says, "Sorry you're part of New York." Vermont says,
"Then we'll fight with the British." And only George Washington's
intervention stopped it when he said, "Our troops will not fight against
people from Vermont." And then Congress said, begrudgingly "You can be
your own entity too."

Uh, no. Vermont was never part of New York, although New York
tried to make it so. Put simply, both New Hampshire and New York
had claims to Vermont, but NH's were better, including a specific
royal grant. The settlers in Vermont largely came from NH but NY
was trying to plant settlements in Vermont. Ethan Allen and his
Green Mountain Boys fought the New Yorkers to keep them out. By
the time of the Revolution, Vermont had voted itself to be
separate entity from either adjoining colony. But the Vermonters
fought on the side of the Americans against the British, since
Vermont wanted Independence, too.

You know, you can look these things up before you post nonsense.
And if it's someone else's nonsense you'd be able to tell what's
wrong with it.

Congress created Mid-western and western states to be roughly equal except
California and Texas.

The fact is that Congress did not create California or Texas - they
created themselves. In the case of California, we acquired that line with
the Mexican War in 1848

Not exactly we didn't. By 1848 the Californians, hearing of the
war, had fomented a revolt and declared the California Republic.
The eastern boundary of California remained to be created, but
the line wasn't created by the war, but rather done after the
war. A great deal of land was acquired in the war, but the
boundaries of the states came later.

Similarly, as far as Texas goes, the Texas Republic did not have
the boundaires we now know; these were established by Congress at
statehood.

Are we going to bring up how Texas can divide itself inot five
separate states whenever it wants to?

and within one year so many people flocked to
California that before Congress could create a territorial government,
California created its own territorial government and sent a proposal to
Congress with boundaries, skipping the whole territorial process - it
wanted to go right to statehood.

That at least is pretty close to the way it happened.


--
************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

"Hatunen" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 20:28:22 -0400, "- Bobb -"
wrote:

Heard this on the radio: he was talking about the origin of the
states/shapes.

The original 13 colonies had defined their areas,

Actually, they hadn't. A number of boundaries of the new states
after the Revolution had to be ironed out later.

and when the US
accumulated the rest of the country there came a point in time when it
was
just expedient to chop up into squares:

I guess that explains Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, Indiana and
Ohio. Adn maybe Iowa.

Those seem to be defined by rivers/lakes ?

And Oklahoma and Minnesota.

Minnesota's border is rivers/mountains

" ... the Indian Territory was gradually reduced to what is now Oklahoma"

On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 20:20:28 -0400, "213_vet" 213@vet wrote:


"Hatunen" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 20:28:22 -0400, "- Bobb -"
wrote:

Heard this on the radio: he was talking about the origin of the
states/shapes.

The original 13 colonies had defined their areas,

Actually, they hadn't. A number of boundaries of the new states
after the Revolution had to be ironed out later.

and when the US
accumulated the rest of the country there came a point in time when it
was
just expedient to chop up into squares:

I guess that explains Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, Indiana and
Ohio. Adn maybe Iowa.

Those seem to be defined by rivers/lakes ?

They could have been chopped up into squares...

And Oklahoma and Minnesota.

Minnesota's border is rivers/mountains

" ... the Indian Territory was gradually reduced to what is now Oklahoma"

Still not chopped up into squares, and these are definitely part
of "the rest of the country". The only "squares" I know of are
Wyoming and Colorado.

--
************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *