Maryland v. West Virginia

217 U.S. 1, 30 S. Ct. 268, 54 L. Ed. 645, 1910 U.S. LEXIS 1942
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedFebruary 21, 1910
Docket1, Original
StatusPublished
Cited by29 cases

This text of 217 U.S. 1 (Maryland v. West Virginia) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Maryland v. West Virginia, 217 U.S. 1, 30 S. Ct. 268, 54 L. Ed. 645, 1910 U.S. LEXIS 1942 (1910).

Opinion

Me. Justice Day

delivered the opinion of the court.

This case originates in a bill filed by the State of Maryland October 12, 1891, against the State of West Virginia, invoking the original jurisdiction of this court conferred by the Constitution for the settlement of controversies between States. At its January session of 1890 the General Assembly of the *23 State of Maryland passed an act authorizing and directing its Attorney General to take such steps as might be necessary to obtain a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States which would settle the controversy between the States of Maryland and West Virginia concerning the true location of that portion of the boundary line between the two States lying between Garrett County, Maryland, and Preston County, West Virginia.

Preston County, West Virginia, was erected out of Monon-galia County, Virginia, in the year 1818. Garrett County, Maryland, was erected out of the western portion of Alle-ghany County under chapter 212 of the Acts of the General Assembly of the State of Maryland of 1872.

The boundary in controversy runs between the two States from the headwaters of the Potomac to the Pennsylvania line.

The bill of complaint states the. foundation of the Maryland title to be the charter granted on June 20, 1632, by King Charles I of England to Cecilius Calvert, Baron of Baltimore, ail rights under which, it is averred, have vested in the complainant, the State of Maryland. Virginia, it is alleged, by her'first constitution of June 29, 1776, disclaimed all rights to property, jurisdiction and government over the territory described in the charter of Maryland and the other colonies, iu the following terms:

“The territories contained within the charters erecting the colonies of Maryland, Pennsylvania, North and South Carolina, are hereby ceded, released and forever confirmed to the people of those colonies respectively, with all the rights of property, "Jurisdiction and government, and all other rights whatsoever which might, at any time heretofore, have been claimed by Virginia, except the free navigation and use of the rivers Potomac and Pokomoke, with the property of the Virginia shores or strands bordering on either of the said rivers, and all improvements which have been or shall be made thereon.”

*24 . The bill also recites complainant’s title to the South Branch of the Potomac River. It avers-the failure to settle thé true location of the boundary line in dispute with West Virginia, which State succeeded to the rights and title of Virginia. The bill charges that the State of West Virginia is wrongly in possession of and exercising jurisdiction over a large part of the territory rightfully belonging to Maryland; that the true line of the western boundary of Maryland is a meridian running south to the first or most distant fountain of the Potomac River, and that such true line is several miles south and west of the line which the State of West Virginia claims, and over which she has attempted to exercise territorial jurisdiction.

The State of West Virginia filed an answer and cross bill, in which she sets up her claim concerning the boundary in dispute between the States, and says that the true boundary line, long recognized and established, is the one known as the “Deakins” line, and in the answer and cross bill she prays to have that line established as the true line between the States. She also alleges in her cross bill that the north bank of the Potomac River from above Harpers Ferry to what is known as the Fairfax Stone is the true boundary between the States; that West Virginia should be awarded jurisdiction over that portion of the river to the north bank thereof.

There is much documentary and other evidence in the record bearing upon the contention that the South Branch of the Potomac River is the true southern boundary of Maryland, but in the briefs and arguments made on behalf of Maryland in this case the claim for the South Branch of the Potomac as the true boundary is not pressed and the controversy is narrowed to the differences in the location of the boundary, taking the North Branch of the Potomac River as the true southern boundary line of Maryland.

As we have already said, the contention of the State of Maryland is rested upon the construction of the charter granted by. King Charles I, June 20, 1632, to Lord Baltimore.

*25 The part of the charter necessary to consider is here given in the original Latin, and the translation thereof, as the same is contended for in the brief filed for the State of Maryland:

Western and Southern Boundaries, which calls are as follows, to wit:

Transuendo a dicto aestuario vocato Delaware Bay recta linea per gradum preedictum usque ad verum-Meridianum primi Fontis Fluminis de Pottomack deinde vergendo versus Meridiem ad ulterio-rem dicti Fluminis Ripam et earn sequendo qua Plaga oc-cidentalis ad MeridianaJis [qu. plagam occidentalem et meri-dianalem] spectat usque ad Locum quendam appelatum Cinquack prope ejusdem Flu-, minis Ostium scituatum ubi in praefatum Sinum de Ches-sopeake evolvitur ac inde per Lineam brevissimam usque ad praedictum Promontorium sive Locum vocatum Wat-kin’s Point.

Going from the said estuary called Delaware Bay in a right line in the degree aforesaid to the true meridian of the first fountain of the river Potomac, then tending downward towards the south to the farther bank of the said river and following it to where it faces the western' and southern coasts as far as to a certain place called Cinquack situate near the mouth of the same river where it discharges itself in the aforenamed bay of Chesapeake and thence by the shortest line, as far as the aforesaid promontory or place called Watkin’s Point.

There is some difference in the record as to the true Latin text and the translation thereof. For- our purpose it is sufficient to consider that presented by the State of Maryland in the language above set forth. It is to be observed that the purpose of this part of the grant was to locate the northern line of the State of Maryland from Delaware Bay “to the true meridian of the first fountain of the river Potomac, then tending downward towards the south to the farther bank of said river, and following it to where it faces the western and *26 southern coasts as far as tc a certain place sailed Cinquack,” etc.

It is the contention of the State of Maryland that the controversy between her and the State of West Virginia is narrowed to a proper location of the true meridian from the first fountain head of the Potomac River, which, being located, will effectually settle the boundary line in dispute. The claim of the State of Maryland may be further illustrated by a consideration of the plate exhibited in the brief filed in behalf of that State, which is herewith given.

It is to be noted in considering this plate that the north and south line at the left is called the Potomac meridian, running from a certain point designated as the Potomac Stone.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

McNulty v. Casero
D. Maryland, 2019
Potomac Shores, Inc. v. River Riders, Inc.
98 A.3d 1048 (Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, 2014)
Virginia v. Maryland
540 U.S. 56 (Supreme Court, 2003)
New Jersey v. New York
523 U.S. 767 (Supreme Court, 1998)
Ohio v. Kentucky
410 U.S. 641 (Supreme Court, 1973)
Moore v. Rone
355 S.W.2d 398 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1962)
Durfee v. Keiffer
95 N.W.2d 618 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1959)
Bostick v. Smoot Sand and Gravel Corporation
154 F. Supp. 744 (D. Maryland, 1957)
Brown v. Jarratt
87 So. 2d 874 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1956)
Wunderlich v. Cates
212 S.W.2d 556 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1948)
Barnes v. State
47 A.2d 50 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1946)
Skiriotes v. State
197 So. 736 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1940)
Arkansas v. Tennessee
310 U.S. 563 (Supreme Court, 1940)
Vermont v. New Hampshire
289 U.S. 593 (Supreme Court, 1933)
United States ex rel. Greathouse v. Hurley
63 F.2d 137 (D.C. Circuit, 1933)
Randolph v. Moberly Hunting & Fishing Club
15 S.W.2d 834 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1929)
Oklahoma v. Texas
272 U.S. 21 (Supreme Court, 1926)
Michigan v. Wisconsin
270 U.S. 295 (Supreme Court, 1926)
Marine Railway & Coal Co. v. United States
257 U.S. 47 (Supreme Court, 1921)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
217 U.S. 1, 30 S. Ct. 268, 54 L. Ed. 645, 1910 U.S. LEXIS 1942, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/maryland-v-west-virginia-scotus-1910.