The Weston Democrat. [volume] (Weston, W. Va.) 1875-current, 1875-05-10

fcnulelpnI hhuuplpuI 1uchtE huu
Preston. This claim was founded up
ou grant Of land by Charles I. 10
Lord Baltimore in June, 1882, the
land being described as THAT region
bounded by a line drawn from Wat
kin's Point on Chesapeake Bay to tho
ocean on the cast, thence to that part
Of the estuary Of Delaware on the
north which heth under tho 40th de-
gree where New England Is termina-
ted; thence in right line by the de-
grees aforesaid to the meridian Of the
fountain Of the Potomac; thence fol-
lowing its course BY its farther bank
to it's confluence"
It was then claimed that the entire
grant was an invasion Of the chartered
rights Of Virginia, and protests were
made by the latter, against what was
said to DO the frat instance Of tho dis
memborment Of an American Colony
BY the home government; but ut the
outbreak Of the Revolution these OBJ
jeetions were withdrawn, and the ter
ritory included in tho grant before
mentioned, was cOded by Virginia to
Maryland, Alter tho close ofthe war
with Great Britain another controversy
broke out between the two States,
Maryland claiming that the South
Branch Of the Potomac was the true
head source OF that river, and being
the longest and largest Of the two
streams, was entitled to DO considered
the fountain Of the Potomac" men.
toned in the conveyance. Legal pro.
ceedings were instituted by Maryland
In 1882 TO recover from Virginia the
additional territory lying within the
limits Of tho lat,Or, which the new
claim covered. and II was at this time
that Mr.. Faulkner's services as Com
missioner for Virginia were secured.
The latter gentleman states that he
did not go 10 England to investigate
the matter, rs frequently stated, a.
though authorized TO do SO, ho having
succeeded in finding documents in The
possession Of tho descendants Of the
Fairfax family, which not only estab-
lished Virginia's claim to the territory
in dispute, but furnished evidence so
clear and satisfactory TO Maryland,
that she at once dismissed the suits,
brought by her. 10 perfect her claim.
Mr.. Faulkner further states that
subsequent to this, the only question
that remained open between the two
States was where the survey Of the
western line Of Maryland should com
mence. In Virginia It had always
been beld that this point was fxod by
the planting Of tho monument known
as the Fairfax Stone, at the source Of
the North Branch Of the Potomac, in
1916, but Maryland commended that
the Fairfax Stone was not situated at
tho western source Of tho North
Branch, the point Of beginning speci.
aed in the Maryland law, and that the
difference between tho two places Of
beginning embraced q section Of coun.
Try about one milo In width and thir-
ty-six miles in length.
Various attempts were made by Wiz.
sinia to settle the question, which arc
set forth in Mr.. Faulkner's letter, but
nothing was then accomplished, and
tho matter remained open until 1852,
when Maryland, by an 40. passed in
that year, expressly recognized the
Fairfax Stone as tho beginning point,
aud invited Virginia to appoint COM
missioners 10 run and mark the line
10 accordance with the long announced
views Of Virginia. This offer was nc.
cepted BY Virginia by an act passed
10 1858, and the line was run accord.
ingly in 1859 by Commissioners
Mcdonald and Lee, with the assistance
Of Lieutenant Michlsr, Of the United
States Coast Survey q
Mr.. Faulkner's statement concludeI
with review Of Lieutenant Michler'a
report Of the survey, which Maryland
adopted March 9Th, 1860. ~ have
no doubt" be says, "lhe line was 40.
curately and skillfully run by Lieuten.
ant MichlOr, and that tho State of West
Virginia should acquiesce in II as an
established fact. It's true, after che
recent line has passed the railroad, and
approaches the Pennsylvania limo,
there is some divergence from The
boundary, as once recognized by The
people Of that section. This might
produce some difficulty aud disturbance
10 tho land titles acquired from Virgin
is in that very limited area Of terrific.
~. But it is probable that very little
practical embarrassment would result
10 any Of the parties concerned; and
Il there should DO any conflict Of titles,
Of which I am not aware, II could DO
readily remodied by the legislation Of
The two States similar to that which
was adopted In the second section Of
The act passed BY The State Of Virginia
on tho 9Th Of March, 1888, entitled
"An act TO settle tho western limits Of
thia Ginka "a u III ILL.,. C...L....i