[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.