Spirit of Jefferson. [volume] (Charles Town, Va. [W. Va.]) 1844-1948, 1869-08-10
THE HARPER's FERRY CASE.

States Circuit Court, at Parkersburg. Chief
Justice Chase presiding. during the last week.
The title to the vast water power OF the Poto-
mac river at Harper's Ferry, which for more
than 70 years has been in possession OF the
limited States Government, was involved in
the issue of this suit. The claim of the Plain
tiff was based on u Patent granted him by the
Commonwealth of Virginia in 1854 The
Defendant, Capt. Young, U. S. A, Cor rather
the United States Government, the real de-
PENDANT in the suit claims under Parent
granted to Robt. A. Harper by Lord Fairfax,
in 1862. and under the following subsequent
conveyances founded on this Patent, viz -
l. A Devise from Robert Harper to Robert
Griffith, October 1st, 1882. 2. A Decd of
Robert Griffith to the executors of Thonlas
Rutherford, January 9th, 1897. 8. a Deed
of Thomas Rutherfords executor, to George
Washington, President of the United States,
aud his successors forever, for the use of the
United States, February, 1907. The plain
tiff claimed that the land granted to Harper
by the above patent does not extend to aud
sido of the northern limits of this patent,
there is strip Of land running along the Vir-
ginia bank of the Potomac, and embracing 81
acres, which was waste land until he acquired
title to it by patent in 1854, as above stated.
The defendant, on the contrary, claimed that
the patent from Harper, Included all the land
SO claimed by the plaintiff-in other words,
that the Potomac river is the northern boun-
dairy of thsir land. Everything in the suit
depended on what should be established az the
northern terminus of the western line of suid
Harper's patent. The length of that limo, as
given in that patent, is 4S poles ;-48 poles
from the beginning Of this line, reaches but
about half way to said river, and to extend
this line to the river, was absolutely necessary
TO successful defence against the claim Of
the plaintiff. This was accomplished in
manner somewhat startling. The official sur
yey, or that made by order of the Court in this
suit, was entirely ignored, as to the line in
question: as were all the known surveys which
had been made of this tract since the date of
the patent granting it to Harper. These sur
veys we're all shown to be in confic; with the
Iocative- calls of this line Of said patent
This line called for the east line Of an older
patent granted to Thomas Maybury, ,cnh
acAich, it must run to high cliff of the Poto>
mac. At the end Of this line. therefore, must
be found such cliff, in order to answer the
call of the patent: The line as it had been
run in all these surveys, did not run with the
line called for, nor TO the cliff called for.
By actual survey, therefore, the east limo
Of Mayburry's patent was found, and then the
vast line of Hsrper's patent run with it,
till the "high cliff" called for was reached =
but no cliff vas found in this line until it
reached the rocky cliff overhanging the Po-
tomac river, now known as Tunnel Cliff" it
vas clear that that must be the high Cliff
called for in the patent.
To run the line to this cliff, it is true, more
than doubled its length Us given in the pat
ent, but as fixed monuments control courses
AID distances in the description Of land con-
veyed, the court instructed the jury, that if
they were satisfied that the line offered by the
defendant was Maybury's line, they would
follow it till the clif called for was reached,
without reference to the distance. The jury
therefore, without hesitancy, found the eud
of this west line Of Harpers putent to be at
the tunnel cliff on the bauk of the river, and
rendered verdict for the defendant. This
bold but entirely successful line OF. defence,
originated with, and was dev eloped by Maj.
E. W. Andrews, of Harper's Ferry, who from
the commencement Of this suit has, with Capt
Young. the defendant of record, had the en-
tire charge of its preparation for trial on the
part of the q. 8. Government.
Justice to Major Andrews, demands that
the following facts should be given to the
public in this connection This gentleman
anticipating few months since that he should
be unable to be present at the trial Of this
cause at Parkersburg, SO notified the Attor>
Ney General of the United States, and asked
his approval OF the substitution, in his place,
Of friend, and an able member of the bar
The Attorney General, however, after lapse
of several weeks, appointed another person
Before this appointment was made, Major y.
had ascertained that he would be able to he
present at the trial of the cause himself and
SO informed the Attorney General. This
officer replied that he desired Maj. A. to re-
sumo his place in the cause and assist at the
trial. if the substitute he had appointed would
retire from the suit without charge to the
Government. This distinguished substitute,
had not, at this tins, even seen the papers Of
the case, or been on the ground in dispute or
given an hours labor to the cause but he
refused to retire, and made an attempt at as
.istanoe nm the trial Hence the reason fnr