Report on the Boundary Survey to his Excellency Joseph E. Brown / Gustavus J. Orr (2 copies)

[001]

Report on the boundary survey.
To his Excellency Joseph E. Brown
Dear Sir,
Having discharged the duties of my
appointment as surveyor on the part of Georgia to
run the boundary line between our state and Flor-
ida, I beg leave to submit the following report.
The resolutions passed by the legislatures of the
two states in 1857 adopted the terminal points of
the recognized boundary, and required a correct line
to be run and marked between those points, pro-
vided it was ascertained that the old line was
incorrect. The surveyors did not think it necessary
to run upon the old line in order to decide as
to its correctness. Indeed they knew before com-
mencing the work, that the old line, from the
manner in which it was run, necessarily de-
flects to the south. They therefore resolved to
run, by an original calculation, a straight line
between the termini without attempting to follow
the old line. Accordingly a calculation
was made with great care. The data used in
this calculation were derived from "Ellicott's journal,"
and the field notes of a survey made in 1854
in obedience to an interlocatory decree of the
supreme court of the United States. Ellicott
and Minor were commissioners respectively on the
part of the United States and Spain to ascertain
and establish the boundary between the territorial
possessions of the two countries, and performed their
work in the year 1800. They determined the latitude
and longitude of the terminal points of that part


[002]

Of the line which runs between Georgia and
Florida by astronomical observation, and these el-
ements were recorded in the journal before referred
to. The survey of 1854 revealed the fact that a
mistake had been made by Ellicott in determin-
ing these elements. The distance between the ter-
mini was found to be greater by actual measure -
ment than Elliott's latitudes and longitudes
would have made it, and it was considered
most probable that his error was committed in
ascertaing the longitudes. Accordingly, by the aid
of geodesic tables, the chaining of 1854 was used
in correcting these longitudes. As part of the
work in determining the latitude and longitude
of the Eastern terminus, Ellicott had run a
traverse. This traverse was carefully re-run in
1854 and found to be inaccurate. The proper
correction was also made here. From these el-
ements given by Ellicott, thus carefully corrected,
the bearing of each end of the line from the other
was computed by Spherical Trigonometry. Having
this ascertained the true azimuths theory would have required the use of
a theodolite or transit in running the line. Ei-
ther of these instruments would carry the operator
upon the arc of a great circle, were the earth a
perfect sphere, a supposition near enough the
truth, in the present case, for all practical purposes.
The surveyor's compass, as is well known, will
not, except when the line run coincide with a
meridian or the equator. In the present instance,
the last named instrument, commencing at
either end, would have run northward of the true
line, the line to be run being in a northern


[003]

latitude and oblique to the meridian. Notwith-
standing these facts, from considerations which were
satisfactory to the minds of the surveyors, it was deter-
mined to use the compass. In order to run with ac-
curacy with a theodolite or transit the instrument
must be made perfectly level and kept so. In
running the present line it would have been hardly
practicable, to do this in many places, to do this.
Fifteen miles of the line lies in the Okefenokee
swamp, and many miles of it in other swamps
where the running was found to be much worse
In many of these swamps the ground is boggy
and shakes under the tread to such a degree as
to render it very difficult to use a compass much
less a transit or theodolite. Moreover, the use of
the transit or theodolite would have rendered it ne-
cessary to remove every obstruction and cut every
tree that fell upon the line. It is not preten-
ded that it would have been absolutely impossi-
ble to overcome these difficulties. But it is
claimed, that to do so, would have required an
expenditure of time and money vastly outweigh-
ing any practical benefits likely to result. For
while it is true that it was impossible to run the
proposed line exactly upon the arc of a great cir
-cle with a compass, yet it was known that a
very close appoximation could be made, so
much so, indeed; that perfect accuracy could hardly
be more desirable. The following is the method
by which this appoximation was effected. The dif-
ference of the azimuths at the two ends of the
line was converted into minutes and this number
was divided by 2 1/2 minutes, (the smallest angle


[004]

that could be laid off on the instrument used) which
gave the number of times the bearing had to be
changed by 2 1/2 minutes. The length of the line was then
divided by the number of times the bearing had
to be changed and this gave the interval at which the
changes were to be made. As the western termi-
nus lies north of the eastern, in this case, the
azimuth had to be diminished by 2 1/2 minutes at
each of these intervals in running eastward.
The opposite change would have been necessary
had the running been westward. A line correctly
run according to this method would, perhaps, at no
point; be further than from thirty to fifty links from
the arc of a great circle. Such a result, for
all practical purposes, would be equivalent to per-
fect accuracy. The calculation having been made
and the azimuths determined according to the method
above explained, the surveyors commenced at the
western terminus and ran eastward. The place
of beginning was determined by a fore and aft tree
upon the old recognized boundary, known as Mc
Neil's line, and is about four chains below the
present junction, the constant attrition of the
waters having worn off the point by about that
amount. The line was carefully run upon the
azimuths called for by the calculation, and came
out 37 links or about 24 feet north of the eastern
terminus known as Ellicott's mound. This was a
result hardly to be hoped for, considering that the
distance to be run was a little over 158 miles,
and proved the correctness of the calculation and
the accuracy of the operations upon the field. It
has been stated that before they commenced their work the surveyors knew that


[005]

the McNeil line, from the manner in which it
was run, necessarily deflected southward,
commenced their work. It is proper that I should
state the reasons for this conclusion. They had in
their possession a certified copy of the plat made
out by McNeil, from which they learned two impor
tant facts; viz. 1st, that his line was run all the
way upon the same azimuth: and 2nd, that the
same allowance was made for the magnitude var-
-iation from one end of the line to the other, a
line run on a sphere at any constant oblique an -
gle with the meridian would form what is known
among mathematical as the loxodromic spiral.
A line, sought to be run with the surveyors compass
in a similar manner, would be, from one sight
to another, upon the arc of a great circle, and from
the second sight to the third, upon the arc of
another great circle, thus forming a succession of
arcs of different great circles, and would approx-
imate the former very closely in position. Such
a line, commenced at either terminus of the boundary
with the proper azimuth, would, in the present case,
run out northward of the other terminus; and then
a corrected line, being similar in form to the guide
line, would necessarily diflect southward, as is known
to every one at all conversant with the principles in-
volved. In this manner was the old boundary line
run. It's deflection southward was still further
aggravated by the second fact above stated. The allow-
ance made for magnitic variation, from one end to the
other, was the variation of Tallahassee, which was much
too great at the eastern terminus, where the line was
commenced, and continued so much the greater por-


[006]

tion of the way. This excess in the allowance is what
aggravated the deflection southward. The difference at
The eastern terminus in the bearing used by McNeil and
and the true bearing is 27'55". The difference in mag-
netic variation between Tallahassee and the eastern
terminus is, at present, about 1. Assuming that this
difference was the same when McNeil's line was run,
and the true line and McNeil's would set out with
a divergence of about 1 1/2 This would cause McNeil's
line to depart southward from the tree line 2.09 chains
in a mile, which, continued uniformly, would sepa-
rate the two lines by a little over a mile in a dis-
tance of forty miles. It is known, however, that this
departure would not be uniform. Unfortunately would
be prevented both by the nature of the two lines run,
and by the fact that the excess of McNeil's variation
would not be the same at different points along the
distance of forty miles. Still, the numbers above are
given in order to show that the causes alledged
are adequate to produce the actual divergence
in the two lines. The two lines come together at the
two terminal points. we were perhaps, at no point
more than from 3/4 of a mile to a mile north of the old boundary,
though the distance between them was never meas-
ured. The two lines come together at the two termi-
nal points and are furthest apart towards the mid
dle portions, running nearer together, however, for
some distance near the western end, than for a like
distance near the eastern, all of which facts
are readily explained by the causes above stated
Before dismissing the McNeil line, it is proper to
state that it was not run originally for a bo-un
dary, but simply as a precautionary line upon


[007]

which the survey of the government lands on the
south side of it might be closed.
The ordinary mode of marking incom-
mon surveying, viz. by chops on the trees was
employed in this survey. But as such lines so marked are
often difficult of identification after a lapse
of a few years, it was thought advisable to have
recourse to other means of a more permanent
character. Accordingly rich light-wood posts
were set up wherever they could be procured,
and mounds of earth were thrown up around
them about five feet in height and ten feet
through at the base. These mounds were
placed at the end of every mile wherever it.
was practicable. The permanency of this kind
of marking is abundantly proved by the fact
that Ellicott's mound B, which was thrown
up sixty years ago, is still well defined and
distinctly visible.
Having given you an account of the man-
ner in which all the duties properly belonging
to the surveyor were performed, I might here
bring this report to a close. But having become
convinced in the progress of the work that our
legislature acted wisely in adopting the pres-
ent settlement, and some important facts, which
constitute the basis of this opinion, not being
generally known, I have thought it advisable
to make this paper the vehicle of their commu-
nication to the public. Allow me, then, to
give, in a condensed form, the leading facts in
the history of this boundary question. The controversy
grew originally out of the difficulty of determin-


[008]

ing the source of the St Mary's river. That and the
mouth of Flint river were recognized as points in
the old boundary line between the United States and
the Spanish possessions, as far back as the Spanish
occupation of Florida; but the question as to what was
the true source of the river seems never to have been
settled. After the acquisition of Florida by the Uni
ted States, and during the continuance of her terri-
torial condition, this was still an unsettled question
and continued to be one after her admission into
the Union as a state. It was contended, on the
one side, that the eastern prong, which takes its
rise in the Okefenokee swamp, was the principal
stream; while the other side, at least at one period,
claimed that the middle prong, which was
said to flow out of Ocean Pond, (now known as
lake Randolph), was entitled to that distinc-
tion. A suit was at length instituted in the
Supreme Coart of the United States between the
States of Georgia and Florida to settle this
question of boundary. It will be recollected
that during the pendency of this suit, Gov.
Broome of Fla. proposed to your predecessor, as
a compromise, to adopt the terminal points of
the then recognized boundary and have a straight
line run between them. Gov. Johnson received
the proposition favorably, and on his recommen-
dation, the legislation passed resolutions carrying
it into effect, and concurrent action being had
on the part of the Florida legislature, the
case was thus taken out of the hands of the
court. It is this action of the legislative that
I have said was founded in wisdom. Ellicott


[009]

and Minor, as has already been stated in a for-
mer part of this report, were commissioners on
the part of the U.S. and Spain from 1796 to
1800 for ascertaing, running, and marking
the boundary between the territorial possessions
of the two countries. The portion of the line between
the month of Flint river and the source of the
St Mary's was never run out, the actual performance
of the work being prevented by the supposed hos-
tility of the Indians. The latitude and longitude
of the month of Flint river and of a point on the
St Marys as far north as they could ascend with
their instruments were determined. A mound was
thrown up by them at this latter point, as has also
been stated, and designated by them mound B.
since known as Ellicotts mound. Near this
mound they found the waters of the St Marys.
issuing from the Okefenokee swamp "with
but little, if any perceptible current." They, there-
fore, come to the conclusion that the source of the
river was near by, and agreed that the termina-
tion of a line run two miles N. E. from mound
B, should be the point from which a line
should be run to the mouth of Flint river,
which line when drawn should be final, and
considered the permanent boundary between
the United States and His Catholic Majesty.
this agreement I find recorded in "Ellicotts
Journal" now lying before me. If the suit
had progressed in the Supreme Court; in what
light would they have viewed this agreement?
Would they have held that the acceptance of the
other parts of the line as determined by the


[010]

commissioners was equivalent to the ratification
of this agreement? If so this would have thrown
the boundary line, at its eastern terminus, a mile
and a half north of the one recently run.
If, on the other hand, it had been held that the
agrument of the Commissioners failed from want
of ratification on the part of their respective gov-
ernments, the court would then have had to decide
the question, what are the head waters of the
St Mary's. The evidence on this point would have
been somewhat varied in its character. In the
first place, no doubt "Ellicott's Journal" would
have been introduced to show what was considered
the principal stream as far back as the year
1800. It is distinctly stated in this journal that
the eastern branch is the main stream, and, in
a plate representing the river, the whole of the
eastern prong is laid down, with just barely
enough of the middle to show its point of
entrance into the eastern.
Secondly, the results of scientific gauging
would have been introduced. About the year 1830
the late Prof. Camak of Athens was employed
by the state to gauge the two streams. I have
not been able to obtain his report, if he ever
made any. I am confident, however, that he
decided in favor of the middle prong, as a line.
was run at that time by E. L. Thomas Esq. from
Lake Randolph to the mouth of Flint river. The
Court would not have relied, however, upon a single
determination from gauging; for the two prongs
being very nearly of the same size, either the east-
ern or the middle would be found to convey more


[011]

11
water at any given time, according as more recent
heavy rains had fallen towards the source of the one
or the other. To make the process of gauging at all
reliable then, it would have been necessary to obtain
the average result of a number of independent
determinations made in several successive years.
Even if the court and the parties had been willing
to postpone a decision so long, it would have
been very uncertain what result would have
been finally reached.
Thirdly, the testimony of settlers would have been
introduced. I was but a short time in the neigh-
borhood of the mound, and did not converse with
many of the settlers. One of these, who resides on
the Georgia side and whose prejudices may be
presumed to have been on the side of his own state, gave
it as his decided opinion, from long continued obser-
observation, that the eastern prong is the principal,
stream. I heard no testimony contradictory to this.
I would further remark, that it is not always the case
That the name of a stream also attachs to the principal
tributary up towards its source. Instances might
be cited to show the truth of this remark. It may
will be doubted, therefore, whether the court
would have decided that prong to be the St Mary's
which conveys the most water greater volume of
water, even after that point was ascertained. They
would more probably have decided, that the source
of that prong, which has borne the name of St Marys
from the earliest ascertainable period, was the
true eastern terminus. From all that has been said,
I think there was strong ground to fear that the
source of the eastern branch would have been made


[012]

12
the terminus, and if this had been the decision, accor
ding to the best evidence that I could collect, the line
would have been thrown fifteen miles above its
present location at the eastern end. When the sur-
vey of 1854 was made a settler, who had been em-
ployed as guide to the party, stated that he had
followed the eastern prong about fifteen miles
up the Okefenokee swamp and found running
water all the way up to the pond whence it
issues. The surveyors employed him to make a
fresh examination that he might be able to
conduct them up the stream without delay
upon their return with the corrected line. The
survey was broken off and they never returned.
The same man, however, was guide to our party,
and stated that in accordance with his engagement
he had made a fresh examination and verified
his former impressions, and that he was then ready
to conduct us up to the source, if we saw proper
to go. In view, then, of the probabilites that the
decision of the court might have made it worse,
and perhaps much worse, for Georgia, I think
it was very wise in the legislature to adopt
the present settlement.
The utmost harmony as to views and
feelings subsisted between the surveyors from
the beginning to the end of the work, and for
the dispatch and accuracy with which it was
accomplished, the public, in both states, is largely
indebted to the energy and professional ability
of the surveyor on the part of Florida. The sur-
very was commenced over the 30th of November and
finished on the 11th of February following, and


[013]

13
although the party were wet, from reading, night
and day from shoe-mouth to half-high deep
for at least one month + a half of the time,
yet they enjoyed almost uninterrupted health; and
I can not close this report without returning
thanks, in this public manner, to Almighty
God for His kind providence over us during
this unusual and protected season of expo-
sure.
Gustavus C. Orr
Emory College, Oxford Ga.
After sitting up send to records


[014]

Gustavus J Orr
Report of Survey of
the Orr & Whitner Boundary
line between Georgia &
Florida


[015]

Report on the boundary Survey
To his Excellency Joseph E. Brown
Dear Sir,
Having discharged the
duties of my appointment as Surveyor on the part
of Georgia to run the boundary line between our
State and Florida, I beg leave to submit the fol-
lowing report.
The resolutions passed by the legislature of
the two States in 1857 adopted the terminal points
of the recognized boundary, and required a correct
line to be run and marked between those points,
provided it was ascertained that the old line was
incorrect. The Surveyors did not think it neces-
sary to run upon the old line in order to decide as
to its correctness. Indeed they knew before commen-
cing the work, that the old line from the manner
in which it was run, necessarily deflects to the
South. They therefore resolved to run by an
original calculation, a straight line between the
termini with out attempting to follow the old line
Accordingly a calculation was made with great
care. The data used in this calculation were
derived from "Ellicott's Journal" and the field notes
of a survey made in 1854 in obedience to an interlo-
cutory decree of the Supreme Court of the United States
Ellicott and Minor were Commissioners respectively on
the part of the United States and Spain to ascertain and
establish the boundary between the territories possessions


[016]

of the two countries, and performed their work in 1800
They determined the latitude and longitude of the
minal points of that part of the line which runs between
Georgia and Florida by astronomical observation,
and these elements were recorded in the Journal before
referred to. The survey of 1854 revealed the fact
that a mistake had been made by Ellicott in de-
termining these elements. The distance between the
termini was found to be greater by actual meas-
urement than Ellicotts latitudes and longitudes
would have made it, and it was considered most
probable that his error was committed in ascer-
taining the longitudes. Accordingly, by the aid
of geodesic tables, the chaining of 1854 was used in
correcting these longitudes. As part of the work in
determining the latitude and longitude of the eastern
terminus, Ellicott had run a traverse. This traverse
was carefully re-run in 1854 and found to be inaccurate.
The proper correction was also made here. From these
elements given by Ellicott, thus carefully corrected the
bearing of each end of the line from the other was, com-
puted by Spherical Trigonometry, Having thus ascertained
the true azimuths theory would have required the use of
a theodolite or transit in running the line. Either of
these instruments would carry the operative upon the area
of a great circle, were the earth a perfect sphere, a
supposition near enough the truth in the present case, for
all practical purposes. The surveyors compass, as is well
known, will not, except when the line run coincides
with a meridian, or the equator. In the present instance


[017]

the last named instrument, commencing at either
end, would have run northward of the true line,
the line to be run being in a northern latitude and
oblique to the meridian. Notwithstanding these facts,
from considerations which were satisfactory to the
minds of the Surveyors, it was determined to use the
compass. In order to run with accuracy with a
theodolite or transit the instrument must be made
perfectly level and kept so. In running the present
line it would have been hardly practicable, in many
places, to do this. Fifteen miles of the line lies in the
Okefenokee Swamp, and many miles of it in other
Swamps where the running was found to be much worse
In many of these Swamps the ground is boggy
and shakes under the tread to such a degree as
to render it very difficult to use a Compass much
less a transit or theodolite. Moreover, the use of the
transit or theodolite would have rendered it necessary
to remove every obstruction, and cut every tree
that fell upon the line. It is not pretended that it
would have been absolutely impossible to overcome
these difficulties. But it is claimed, that to do so,
would have required an expenditure of time and
money vastly outweighing any practical benefits
likely to result. For while it is true that it was
impossible to run the proposed line exactly upon the
arc of a great circle with a compass, yet it was
known that a very close approximation could be
made, so much so, indeed that perfect accuracy
could hardly be more desireable. The following


[018]

is the method by which this approximation was effected.
The difference of the azimuths at the two ends of the line
was converted into minutes and this number was divi-
ded by 2 1/2 minutes, (the smallest angle that could be
laid off on the instrument used), which gave the num-
ber of times the bearing had to be changed by 2 minutes
The length of the line was then divided by the number of
times the bearing had to be changed and this gave the
interval at which the changes were to be made.
As the western terminus lies north of the eastern, in
this case, the azimuths had to be diminished by 2 mi-
nutes at each of these intervals in running eastward
The opposite change would have been necessary had
the running been westward. A line correctly run
according to this method, would, perhaps, at no point
be further than from thirty to fifty links from the
arc of a great circle. Such a result for all prac
tical purposes would be equivalent to perfect ac-
curacy. The calculation having been made and the
azimuths determined according to the method above
explained. The surveyors commenced at the west-
ern terminus and ran eastward. The place of begin
ing was determined by a fore and oft tree upon the old
recognized boundary, known as McNeils line, and is
about four chains below the present junction, the con
stant attrition of the water having worn off the point
by about that amount. The line was carefully run
upon the azimuths called for by the calculation, and
came out 37 links, or about 24 feet north of the east-
ern terminus known as Ellicotts mound. This was a


[019]

result hardly to be hoped for, considering that
the distance run was a little over 158 miles, and
proved the correctness of the calculation, and the
accuracy of the operations upon the field. It has been
stated that the surveyors knew before they com-
menced the work that the McNeil line, from the
manner in which it was run, necessarily de-
flected southward. It is proper that I should
state the reasons for this conclusion. They had in their
possession a certified copy of the plat made out by
McNeil, from which they learned two important
facts; viz. 1st that his line was run all the way
upon the same azamuth: and 2d, that the same
allowance was made for the magnetic variation
from one end of the line to the other. A line run
on a sphere at any constant oblique angle with the
meridian would form what is known among math-
ematicians as the loxodromic spiral. A line,
sought to be run with the surveyors compass in
a similar manner, would be from one sight to
another, upon the arc of a great circle, and from
the second sight to the third, upon the arc of another
great circle, thus forming a succession of arc's
of different great circles, and would approximate
the former very closely in position. Such a line
commencing at either terminus of the boundary with
the proper azimuth, would, in the present case, run
out northward of the other terminus; and then a cor-
rected line, being similar in form to the guide line,
would necessarily deflect southward, as is know to


[020]

every one at all conversant with the principles in-
volved. In this manner was the old boundary line
run. Its deflection southward was still further ag-
gravated by the second fact above stated. The allowance
made for magnetic variation, from one end to the
other, was the variation of Tallahassee, which was
much too great at the eastern terminus, where the
line was commenced, and continued so much the
greater portion of the way. This excess in the allowe
ance is what aggravated the deflection southward.
The difference at the eastern terminus, in the bear-
ing used by McNeil and the true bearing is 27'55"
The difference in magnetic variation between Talla-
hassee and the Eastern terminus is, at present, about
1. Assuming that this difference was the same
when McNeils line was run, and the true line and
McNeils would set out with a divergence of about 1.
This would cause McNeils line to depart southward
from the true line 2.09 chains in a mile, which con-
tinued uniformly, would separate the two lines by a
little over a mile in a distance of forty miles. It is
known, however, that this departure would not be uni
form. Uniformity would be prevented both by the
nature of the two lines run, and by the fact, that the
excess of McNeils variation would not be the same
at different points along the distance of forty
miles. Still the numbers above are given in order
to show that the causes alleged are adequate to
produce the actual divergence in the two lines.
We were perhaps, at no point, more than from 3/4


[021]

of a mile to a mile north of the old boundary, though
the distance between them was never measured. The
two lines come together at the two terminal points
and are furthest apart toward the middle por-
tions, running nearer together, however, for some
distance near the western end, than far a like
distance near the eastern, all of which facts are
readily explained by the causes above stated.
Before dismissing the McNeil line, it is proper to state
that it was not run originally for a boundary line
but simply as a precautionary line upon which the
survey of the government lands on the south side
of it might be closed. The ordinary mode of
marking in common surveying, viz. by chops on
the trees was employed in this survey. But lines
so marked are often difficult of identification after
a lapse of a few years. it was thought advisable
to have recourse to other means of a more perma
nent character. Accordingly rich light-wood
posts were set up whenever they could be pro-
cured, and mounds of earth were thrown up around
them about five feet in height, and ten feet
through at the base. These mounds were
placed at the end of every mile wherever it
was practicable. The permanency of this kind
of marking is abundantly proved by the fact that
Ellicotts Mound B, which was thrown up sixty years
ago, is still well defined and distinctly visible.
Having given you an account of the manner
in which all the duties properly belonging to the


[022]

Surveyor were performed, I might here bring
this report to a close. But having become convin-
ced in the progress of the work, that our legislature
acted wisely in adopting the present settlement, and
some important facts, which constitute the basis of
this opinion, not being generally known. I have
thought it advisable to make this paper the vehicle
of their communication to the public. Allow me, then,
to give, in a condensed form the leading facts in
the history of this boundary question. The controversy
grew originally out of the difficulty of determining
the source of the St Marys river. That, and the mouth
of Flint river were recognized as points in the old
boundary line between the United States and the Spanish
possessions, as far back as the Spanish occupation
of Florida; but the question as to what was the true
course of the river seems never to have been set-
tled. After the acquisition of Florida by the
United States and during the continuance of her
territorial condition, this was still an unsettled
questions, and continued to be one after her ad-
mission into the Union as a State. It was con-
tended, on the one side, that the Eastern prong
which takes its rise in the Okefenokee swamp
was the principal stream; while the other side at
least at one period, claimed that the middle from
which was said to flow out of Ocean Pond, now
known as lake Randolph, was entitled to that dis-
tinction. A suit was at length instituted in the
Supreme Court of the United States between the States


[023]

of Georgia and Florida to settle this question of boun
dary. It will be recollected that during the pen
dency of this suit. Geo Broome of Florida proposed to
your predecessor, as a compromise, to adopt the
minal points of the then recognized boundary and have
a straight line run between them. Gov Johnson re-
ceived the proposition favorably, and on his recom
mendation, the legislature passed resolutions carry-
ing it into effect, and concurrent action being had
on the part of the Florida legislature. the case was there
taken out of the hands of the court. It is this action
of the legislature that I have said was founded in
wisdom. Ellicott and Minor as has already been
stated in a former part of this report, were commis
sioners on the part of the U.S. and Spain from 1796
to 1800, for ascertaining running and marking
the boundary between the territories of the
two countries. The portion of the line between the
month of flint river, and the source of the St Mary's
was never run out, the actual performance of the
work being prevented by the supposed hostility of
the Indians. The latitude and longitude of the
mouth of Flint river, and of a point on the St
Marys as far north as they could assend with
their instruments were determined. A mound now
thrown up by them at this latter point, as has also
been stated, and designated by them, Mound, B,
since known as Ellicotts wound. Near this mound
they found the waters of the St Mary's issuing from the
Okefenokee Swamp, with but little, if any perceptible


[024]

current. They therefore came to the conclusion that
the source of the river was near by, and agreed
that the termination of a line run two miles N. E.
from mound B should be the point from which a line
should be run to the mouth of Flint river, "which
line when drawn should be final, and considered
the permanent boundary between the United States and
his Catholic Majesty." This agreement I find recor
ded in Ellicotts journal now lying before me. If the
suit had progressed in the Supreme Court, in what
light would they have viewed this agreement: would
they have held that the acceptance of the other parts
of the line as determined by the Commissioners was
equivalent to the ratification of this agreement. If so
this would have thrown the boundary line, at its
eastern terminus, a mile and a half north of the
one recently run. If on the other hand it
had been held that the agreement of the com
missioners failed from want of ratification on
the part of their respective government, the court
would then have had to decide the question
what are the head waters of the St Marys. The
evidence on this point would have been somewhat
varied in its character. In the first place, no
doubt Ellicotts Journal would have been introdu
ced to show what was considered the principal
stream as far back as the year 1800. It is
distinctly stated in this journal that the eastern
branch is the main stream, and in a plate rep
resenting the river, the whole of the eastern prong


[025]

is laid down, with just barely enough of the
middle to show its point of entrance into the eastern.
Secondly, the result of scientific guaging would
have been introduced. About the year 1830 the late
Prof Camack of Athens was employed by the State
to guage the two streams. I have not been able to obtain
this report if he ever made any. I am confident, however,
that he decided in favor of the middle prong, as a
line was run at that time by E L Thomas Esqr.
from lake Randolph to the mouth of Flint river.
The Court would not have relied, however, upon a
single determination from guaging: for the two prongs
being very nearly of the same size, either the eastern or
the middle would be found to convey more water at
any given time, according as more recent heavy rains
had fallen towards the source of the one or the other.
To make the process of guaging at all reliable then,
it would have been necessary to obtain the average
result of a number of independent determinations
made in several successive years. Even if the court
and the parties had been willing to postpone a decision
so long, it would have been very uncertain what
result would have been finally reached.
Thirdly, the testimony of settlers would have been in-
troduced. I was but a short time in the neighborhood
of the mound, and did not converse with many of the
settlers. One of these who resides on the Georgia side,
and whose prejudices may be presumed to have been
on the side of his own state, give it as his decided
opinion, from long continued observation, that the


[026]

eastern prong is the principal stream. I heard no
testimony contradictory to this. I would further re
mark, that it is not always the case that the name of
the stream also attaches to the principal tributary up
towards its source. Instances might be cited to show
the truth of this remark. It may well be doubted, there
fore, whether the court would have decided that prong
to be the St Marys which conveys the greater volume
of water, even after that point was ascertained.
They would more probably have decided, that the source
of that prong, which has borne the name of St Mary's
from the earliest ascertainable period, was the true east
ern terminus. From all that has been said, I think
there was strong ground to fear that the source of the
eastern branch would have been made the terminus,
and if this had been the decision, according to the best
evidence that I could collect. the line would have been thrown
fifteen miles above its present location at the eastern
end. When the survey of 1854 was made, a Settler
who had been employed as guide to the party
stated that he had followed the Eastern prong about
fifteen miles up the Okefenokee Swamp, and found
running water all the way up to the pond
whence it issues. The surveyors employed him to
make a fresh examination, that he might be able to
conduct them up the stream without delay upon
their return with the corrected line. The survey was
broken off and they never returned. The same man
however, was guide to our party, and stated that in
according with his engagement, he had made a fresh


[027]

examination and verified his former impressions
and that he was then ready to conduct us up to the
source, if we saw proper to go. In view, then,
of the probabilities that the decision of the court might
have made it worse, and perhaps much worse,
for Georgia. I think it was very wise in the legis-
lature to adopt the present settlement
The utmost harmony as to views and feelings sub-
sisted between the surveyors from the beginning to the
end of the work, and for the dispatch and accuracy
with which it was accomplished, the public in both
States, is largely indebted to the energy and profession
ability of the Surveyor on the part of Florida. The
survey was commenced on the 30th of November and
finished on the 11th of February following, and although
the party were wet, from wading, night and day
from Shoe, mouth to half-thigh deep for at least
one month and a half of the time, yet they enjoyed
almost uninterrupted health; and I cannot close
this report without returning thanks, in this pub
lic manner, to Almighty God for His kind prov
idence over us during this unusual and protracted
season of exposure
Gustavus J. Orr
Emory College Oxford, Ga


[028]

Ga & Florida
Boundary Line
Report of the
Georgia Surveyor.