Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1896-08-20
DISPUTED STATE LINE
A Geographical Jarndyoe Case Before the
Supreme Court.
Maryland and West Virginia Contest
Over q Wedge OF Territory at
the Potomac's Source.

The United States Supreme Court will
soon after it reconvenes be called upon to
settle dispute between the states Of Mary
land and West Virginia which grows out
OF an error committed by Lord Fairfax
when he laid out the boundary line between
Maryland and Virginia $50 years ago. The
question Is as to the ownership Of q strip
OF land three-quarters of a mile wide at
the widest part, thlrty-seven miles long
ana tapering to a point and now claimed
as u part Of Garrett county, Nd
1t has truly been as lawyers have termed
1t. "a long-drawn-out case" and on account
OF the length of time which elapsed before
Maryland undertook to assert her rights
Although 1t is claimed there is no doubt OF
ner risnt TO the strip OF land In Question
the judgment OF the court may be against
ner According to the evidence gathered on
me subject by the various attorneys gen
eral OF Maryland who have handled the
case, the mistake appears 10 have arisen
through the setting up of the Lord Fairfax
stone IN 1I46 near the head of the North
branch of the Potomac river instead of tn.
South branch. under the impression that
the former was the longer stream and prop
ef headwaters of the river. and without
the knowledge or assent of Lord BaIti-
rncre who subsequently protested against
Inc boundary line as thus established.
NO further action was, however, taken
until 1.71 on account of the raging of the
French and Indian wars during the inter-
Vening twenty-five years. In l77l the gov
efnOr OF Maryland appointed a commission
under which a survey was made by Thomas
Cresap. who found that the most westerly
tcuntdln Of the Potomac was the South
branch. Another delay was caused by the
revolutionary war. The state of Virginia
then took possession of her territory and
as claimed. ceded to Maryland all land un-
der her charter. Subsequently the contro-
versy was resumed between the two states
lDDeArl vlYiOn1 mir Of ho la<r
lsiature Of Maryland and letters which
passed between the governors Of the two
states between 1876 and 1926. Virginia also
passed an act in 1893, having for its object
the settlement of the boundary line and the
appointment of the commissioners, who
were to meet similar commissioners On the
part Of Maryland. In 1884 the state Of
Maryland filed a bill in the United States
Supreme Court against the state of Nir-
ginia 10 settle the case, " hich, however, n
the belief that the question could be ami
caply settled. was subsequently withdrawn.
But no settlement was reached and the
years. being revived in 1854, when both
states passed acts for the appointment OF
commissioners to have the line surveyed
Further Efforts.
Nothing was done under these acts, and
in 1853 Virginia passed an act providing for
joint commission to trace the southern
boundary from Smiths Point 20 the At
lantic ocean, and the western boundary
from the Fairfax stone to the PennsyI-
vania line" The Maryland act of 1852 pro-
vided only for the appoln; rneat of a Joint
commission to run line north from the
Fairfax stone, with the express provision
that such line, when ratified Icy both leg
islatures," should he The boundary between
the two states, but 1t contained 10 pro-
vision concerning the settlement Of the
southern boundary.
Commissioner T. J. Lee of Maryland met
Col. Angus w. Mcdonald, commissioner of
Virginia, and proceeded to carry out in
structioIs in reference to the western
boundary. The services of Lieut.. n. Mich
Ter United States army, were obtained, and
line was run from the Fairfax stone to
the pennsylvania line about three-four hs
OF A mile west of the Deaains line THIS
would give Maryland the wedge Of land
she. now claims IN the controversy The
legislature OF MARYLAND promptly ratified
this line. but Virginia did not. passing in
stead two resolutions, one to mark Mich
lerS line, and another to send an agent TO
europe to collect documentary evidence
10 ascertain and establish the true lines
Of boundary, ETC." thus leaving the ques-
ton still open and, as the state Of Mary
iand now claims, leaving her clearly re-
mitted to her original rights under her
charter, and the distinct recognition of her
boundaries thereun1er by the Virginia con-
stitution of 1915.
No Settlement Reached.
The war prevented further consideration
OF the question, and afterward the state of
West Virginia. which was formed during
the war. claimed she was not bound by the
I1chler line. as Virginia had never ratified
It, West Virginia in 1868 passed an act for
a JOINT survey, but none was made and
Maryland took no further steps until 1886
when the governor was requested to bring
the matter to the attention of the governor
of West Virginia. and the legislature of
the latter state then passed an act ratify-
ing tie Michler line, but with such restric-
ions as were rot acceptable to Maryland
The present suit was afterward entered by
Attorney General William Pinkney Whyte
and Mr.. John P. Poe, his successor Attor-
ney General Harry NJ. Clabaugh having
succeeded Mr.. Poe in office. will try the
case before the Supreme Court.