The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1891-05-29

i Iu UpN, UO"tNtI' u-lItNc ID! ihD'
mpnt that such n position can be
maintained III the face of the act of
1852, aside from all which preceded
1t upon this subject.
1 quote from the Act of 1852 as fol-
lows:
IAN Act for running and marking
the boundary line of this state
Whereas. 1t is of great importance
that the Westerl territorial limits of
the state of Maryland be clearly de-
fined and her boundaries permanent
ly established /; and
WHEREAS, The true location of
the western line of Maryland be-
tween the states of Maryland and
Virginia. beginning at or near the
Fairfax stone on the North Brancn
# the Potomac liver. at or near its
source and running due moth line
to the state Of Pennsylvania, is now
lost anil unknown, aud all the mark
have been destroyed ny time or other
wise ; and
WHEREAS, The states of Virginia
and Maryland have both granted
patents to the same tracts of land al
or near the supposed line. and suits
in ejectment are nowlpending in the
circuit court of AIlegany county, in
the state of Maryland, by persons
holding under Maryland patents
against persons now in possession
and holding land under patents
granted by the state of Virginia,
which can not be justly settled with.
out establishing said boundary line"
Section One. of the Act provides
for the appointment of Commission,
erS.
Section Two, provides that the
commissioners shall accurately sur.
vey. trace and mark the line, "be-
ginning therefor at The said Fairfax
stone and running thence due north"
Could language be more specific
than chosen by the legislature? Note
the phraseOlOgy Begin at the Fair
fax stone, run due north and trace
and mark the line" What line?
The line which Deakins had run in
1888. Does not t is language fully
explain what the legislature intended
ny the Act of 1888.
Is it not easy to understand what
the legislature intended when it ac-
cepted the survey and plat made by
Deakins and placed it in the Land
Office Of the state, Certainly if the
state had not intended the Deakins
line to be the boundary it would not
have, by the solemn act of it's legis-
Iature. appointed commissioners and
ordered them t. trace and mark the
line so run by him for the purpose of
establishing the boundary in order
that land titles might be settled on
both sides of said line in accordance
with grants from the two states. 1t
will be borne in mind that the PR.
amble to the act of 1852. when |
have quoted, sets forth that there
were questions of title in the courts
which could not be Justly settled
without establishing said boundary
line. The commissioners then were
appointed to establish the boundary
line in order that titles might he
justly settled, and in order to estab
lish 1t the commissioners were order.
Ell to begin at the Fairftx stone. II
this is not formal abandonment and
waiver of any and all claims on the
part of Maryland to any beginning
other than the Fairf K stone, | do
not comprehend w hat would Or could
amount to a waiver in such a case.
How it can be contended. successfully
that the State of Maryland still
claims to South Branch. 1 am at a
loss to understand.
Again. after the commission an.
pointed by the Act of 1852 had run
the line beginning at the Fairfax
stone and reported the feet the iegis
lature of Maryland ratified it. Fair.
fax stone and all. Not only this.
but Marylanders now claim that the
Mlchler line run by that commission
from that point is correct. and that
the boundary so run was correctly es.
tablished by that survey. What
then. may l ask. has become of the
contention of those who claim that
the beginning POINT of that line as
called for in the original grant has
not, AS yet been settled, adopted.
ratified nor agreed to by the state of
Maryland?
A young lady wants to know how
to make mot enough" out of the
xuN.I